ADAM and EVE - The Search For The True Story V9.3

ADAM
AND EVE
The search for the true story
By Tom Delbridge
Copyright Tom Delbridge 2013

ADAM AND EVE:
The search for the
true story
Copyright Tom Delbridge 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE..................................................................................................................
PART I INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................
Chapter 1 The Date an !ocat"on of the Aa#
an E$e %tory..........................................................................................................
Chapter & The Cast of the Aa# an E$e
%tory......................................................................................................................
Chapter ' The Fra#e(or) of the Aa# an
E$e %tory...............................................................................................................
Chapter * +uest"ons a,out the Aa# an E$e
%tory......................................................................................................................
PART II EAR!- C.RI%TIAN VIE/% OF T.E %TOR-
.................................................................................................................................
Chapter 0 1esus an the Aa# an E$e %tory
..............................................................................................................................
Chapter 2 Pau3 an the Aa# an E$e %tory
..............................................................................................................................
Chapter 4 Au5ust"ne an the Aa# an E$e
%tory......................................................................................................................
Chapter 6 Ca3$"n an the Aa# an E$e %tory
..............................................................................................................................
PART III NE/ !I7.T %.ED ON T.E %TOR- IN
T.E...........................................................................................................................
18T. AND &9T. CENTURIE%.....................................................................................
Chapter 8 :",3e %cho3arsh"p...............................................................................
Chapter 19 18th Century %c"ence......................................................................
Chapter 11 &9th Century %c"ence......................................................................
PART IV EAR!- &1%T CENTUR- C.RI%TIAN
VIE/%.......................................................................................................................
OF T.E %TOR-..........................................................................................................
Chapter 1& The Response to the Ne( !"5ht
%he on the %tory..................................................................................................
Chapter 1' The Funa#enta3"st Chr"st"an
Approach to the %tory...........................................................................................
Chapter 1* The E$an5e3"ca3 Chr"st"an
Approach to the %tory...........................................................................................
Chapter 10 The !",era3 Chr"st"an Approach to
the %tory...............................................................................................................
PART V T.E %EARC. FOR T.E TRUE %TOR-..........................................................
Chapter 12 %earch"n5 for the True Aa# an
E$e %tory...............................................................................................................
Chapter 14 An Ear3"er Vers"on of the Aa#
an E$e %tory;....................................................................................................
Chapter 16 The T(o Facets of the Present
Aa# an E$e %tory............................................................................................
Chapter 18 The Actua3 Re(r"t"n5 of the Aa#
an E$e %tory......................................................................................................
PART VI IMP!ICATION% FOR READIN7 T.E :I:!E
...............................................................................................................................
AND 7RA%PIN7 T.E C.RI%TIAN ME%%A7E.............................................................
Chapter &9 A Pos"t"$e Approach to 7o............................................................
Chapter &1 A Pos"t"$e Approach to the :",3e
............................................................................................................................
Chapter && The Messa5e of 1esus an the
Chr"st"an Messa5e...............................................................................................
PART VII FACIN7 UP TO T.E C.A!!EN7E% OF
T.E.........................................................................................................................
&1%T CENTUR-........................................................................................................
Chapter &' Defen"n5 the Chr"st"an Messa5e
............................................................................................................................
Chapter &* E<p3a"n"n5 the Chr"st"an Messa5e
............................................................................................................................
Chapter &0 7ett"n5 the Aa# an E$e
Messa5e out to Chr"st"ans...................................................................................
Chapter &2 Pract"ca3 Cha33en5es Face ,y the
Church Toay.......................................................................................................
Chapter &4 The ne( ,"otechno3o5y..................................................................
Chapter &6 A &1st Century %upp3e#ent to the
Aa# an E$e %tory............................................................................................
Appen"< Out3"ne of the Case for Dat"n5 the
%tory at *64 :.C..................................................................................................
:oo)s C"te.........................................................................................................
Ine<...................................................................................................................
%ynops"s of the :oo)...........................................................................................
All Bible quotations are taken from the e!ised "tandard #ersion$ e%&ept 'here other'ise stated(
)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
PREFACE
*ou are$ + am sure$ familiar 'ith the Adam and ,!e story set out in -enesis 2)3
.Chapters 2 and 3 of the Book of -enesis/ in the Bible( *our !ie' of the story$
'ith its talking snake and ,!e made from one of Adam0s ribs$ doubtless lies
some'here along the follo'ing line1

And if + asked you 'hen the story 'as &ompiled$ and 'here and by 'hom$ you
'ould probably suggest some point along this timeline1
2o one kno's for &ertain 'hen$ 'here or by 'hom the story 'as 'ritten( But
sin&e the middle of the 13th &entury$ s&ientists and Bible s&holars ha!e shone a
great deal of ne' light on the story( "&ientists$ starting 'ith Charles Dar'in$ ha!e
produ&ed a &ompelling a&&ount of the origins of Homo sapiens( And Bible s&holars
ha!e produ&ed a persuasi!e &ase for -enesis ha!ing been put into its present form
in the 4th &entury B(C(
Armed 'ith this ne' light + aim in this book to sear&h$ along 'ith you$ for the true
Adam and ,!e story1 to paint a mu&h more positi!e pi&ture both of the story and of
-od himself than many people ha!e held in the past( +f you are a Christian or 5e'$
then + hope that 'hat + say 'ill help to deepen your trust in -od( +f you are an
atheist$ then + hope that the a&&ount + gi!e 'ill remo!e any thoughts you may ha!e
that s&ien&e has 6dispro!ed6 the Adam and ,!e story( And + hope that you 'ill
e!entually agree 'ith the !ie' 'hi&h + ha!e rea&hed$ that the story is a parable and
'as 'ritten in its present form 2$400 years ago$ in 789 B(C( in Babylon(
+ am neither a s&ientist$ nor a Bible s&holar nor a Chur&h figure( :y qualifi&ations
for 'riting this book are simply that + 'as a &onfirmed atheist until the age of 3;
and ha!e been a &onfirmed Christian from then until my present age of ;3( That +
'as a poli&e offi&er for o!er thirty years$ 'ell used to &ondu&ting sear&hes( And
that + ha!e a 'ife 'ho has argued 'ith me in&essantly about the Adam and ,!e
story o!er the 14 year period that it has taken me to put this parti&ular sear&h onto
paper(
PART I INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1 The Date and Location of the Adam
and Eve Stor
<et us start 'ith the date and lo&ation of the story$ beginning 'ith the e!ents
des&ribed and then turning to the a&tual 'riting of the story(
The date of the events in the story
+n 1;40 Ar&hbishop =ssher published his famous date of 7007 B(C( for the &reation
of Adam and ,!e( >e arri!ed at this date by studying the genealogies in -enesis$
&oupled 'ith things said in other Bible !erses and the statement in ?tolemy0s
Canon of @ings that 2ebu&hadneAAar ++ of Babylon died in 4;2 B(C( 5e'ish
s&holars arri!ed at the slightly different date of 39;0 B(C( .or rather 39;0 BC,$
meaning 6before the &ommon era6/( ,ither 'ay$ a literal reading of the Bible dates
Adam and ,!e ) and thus the arri!al of mankind ) at some ;$000 years ago(
That last statement goes to the heart of the sear&h for the true Adam and ,!e story$
'ith s&ien&e ha!ing sho'n that Homo sapiens emerged some 190$000 years ago(
But let us not be too qui&k to leap into &ontro!ersial 'ater( The important thing at
this point is that$ on the fa&e of matters$ the e!ents took pla&e at the time of the first
human beings(
The location of the events of the story
-enesis 2 seems to pinpoint e%a&tly the lo&ation of the -arden of ,den 'here the
e!ents of the story took pla&e1

10
A ri!er flo'ed out of ,den to 'ater the garden$ and there it
di!ided and be&ame four ri!ers(
11
The name of the first is ?ishonB
it is the one 'hi&h flo's around the 'hole of >a!ilah$ 'here there
is goldB
12
and the gold of that land is goodB bdellium and ony%
stone are there(
13
The name of the se&ond ri!er is -ihonB it is the
one 'hi&h flo's around the 'hole land of Cush(
14
And the name
of the third ri!er is Tigris$ 'hi&h flo's east of Assyria( And the
fourth ri!er is the ,uphrates(
The identity of the ?ishon and -ihon ri!ers is unkno'n( But the Tigris and
,uphrates are the prin&ipal ri!ers in modern +raq and merge today in the e%treme
southern part of that &ountry( =nfortunately there is some e!iden&e that the Tigris
and ,uphrates pre!iously had separate outlets into the sea and that the &oastline is
no' further south than before( ,ither 'ay$ all that &an be said is that$ on the fa&e of
matters$ the -arden of ,den 'as lo&ated in 'hat is no' southern +raq(
The date of the writing of the story
Chen + read -enesis for the first time$ + assumed that the opening pages .-enesis
1)3/ 'ere the !ery first part of the Bible to ha!e been 'ritten$ presumably in or
around 7007 B(C( + thought that -od had gi!en Adam the 6si% days6 Creation
a&&ount in a dream$ 'ith the sequen&e and times&ale simplified for a man 'ho
'ould not ha!e understood either the , D m&
2
equation of relati!ity theory or the
figure of 10 billion years or so for the age of the uni!erse( And + imagined that
Adam had made a note of the dream in his diary$ in 'hi&h he also kept a re&ord of
e!erything that happened in the -arden of ,den(
+t 'as only later that + found out that 'riting 'as not in!ented until around 3200
B(C( and that$ in fa&t$ there is no &ertainty about e%a&tly ho' or 'hen the Adam
and ,!e story &ame to be 'ritten(
:any Christians see the story as Adam0s and ,!e0s first)hand eye)'itness a&&ount
of the e!ents des&ribed$ initially passed do'n the generations by 'ord of mouth
and not 'ritten do'n until mu&h later( :any other Christians .and all Erthodo%
5e's/ belie!e that -od di&tated the entire te%t of -enesis$ ,%odus$ <e!iti&us$
2umbers and Deuteronomy 'ord)by)'ord to :oses on :ount "inai in around the
13th &entury B(C(
That last statement again goes to the heart of the sear&h for the true Adam and ,!e
story$ 'ith Bible s&holars asserting that the Book of -enesis 'as not put into its
present form until the 4th &entury B(C( And also suggesting that the 6si% days6
Creation a&&ount in -enesis 1 &ame from an earlier do&ument labelled 6P6$
'hereas the Adam and ,!e story &ame from an e!en earlier do&ument labelled 6J6(
But for the time being let us Fust say that the story 'as probably not 'ritten do'n
until thousands of years after the e!ents it des&ribes(
The location of the writing of the story
The question of 'here the Adam and ,!e story 'as 'ritten depends on the !ie'
taken of 'hen it 'as 'ritten( +f the story &ame ultimately from the lips of Adam
and ,!e then it 'as &omposed$ if not a&tually 'ritten do'n$ in the !i&inity of ,den
in 'hat is no' southern +raq( +f -od di&tated it to :oses in around the 13th
&entury B(C( then the lo&ation 'as :ount "inai( And if -enesis 'as not put into its
present form until the 4th &entury B(C( then the lo&ation 'as almost &ertainly
Babylon$ 'ith important impli&ations for se!eral elements of the story(
Chapter ! The Ca"t of the Adam and Eve
Stor
<et us look no' at the &ast of the Adam and ,!e story1 -od$ the snake and finally
Adam and ,!e themsel!es(
God
The key member of the &ast of the story is -od and there are four things 'e &an
say for &ertain about him( Ce &annot see him( Ce &annot adequately des&ribe him
in 'ords( Ce &an$ ho'e!er$ &ome to kno' him and to e%perien&e his lo!e and
forgi!eness( And 'e kno' e%a&tly 'here to find him( Atheists 'ill disagree 'ith
the last t'o points and the final one 'ill surprise e!en some Christians( "o let me
e%plain 'hat + mean(
Cith ,nglish a fairly rare e%&eption$ most languages use the same 'ord for hea!en
and sky$ in&luding >ebre' and -reek .the original languages of the Bible/( And
the idea that -od li!es in a hea!en high abo!e the sky goes ba&k to the days 'hen
almost e!eryone thought that the earth 'as flat and that the sky e%tended at most a
fe' thousand feet abo!e the earth$ hen&e the To'er of Babel story in -enesis 11(
But e!en though 'e no' kno' that the sky e%tends for billions of miles .and then
some/ beyond the earth$ many Christians still imagine that -od is 'ay out there
some'here$ prompting atheists to question ho' -od &an possibly &ommuni&ate
'ith mankind 'ithout s&ientists 6pi&king up the signals6(
+n fa&t$ though$ both these Christians and these atheists are 'rong( <et us look at
the follo'ing t'o diagrams$ one from relati!ity theory and the other illustrating the
point that + 'ant to make1
>ea!en is not in a spiritual realm e%isting 'ay beyond our gala%y but is rather in a
spiritual dimension 'hi&h interse&ts 'ith the four spa&e)time dimensions deep
inside ea&h of our minds .more on this in Chapter 22/( -od is not some remote
deity light years a'ay from us in outer spa&e( +nstead he li!es 'ithin the spiritual
dimension$ ne!er more than a nanometre a'ay from us( The reason 'hy 'e &annot
see -od is not that he is too far a'ay$ but that he is too &lose to us( And the reason
'hy so many people do not kno' -od is that they shut their minds to the !ery
possibility of his e%isten&e$ Fust as + did for the first 3; years of my life(
2o' 'e &an be sure that$ 'hene!er the Adam and ,!e story 'as 'ritten$ it 'as at
a time 'hen no one en!isaged four$ let alone fi!e dimensions( "o the pi&ture 'hi&h
the story gi!es of -od is understandably different from the one 'e ha!e today(
-enesis 1 speaks of 6man$ male and female6 &reated in -od0s image( But in
-enesis 2)3 'e find -od portrayed$ 'rongly$ in man0s image1 6'alking in the
garden in the &ool of the day6(
+f the Adam and ,!e story &an be 'rong in one respe&t then 'e need to ask
'hether the story may also be 'rong 'hen it talks about -od0s 6greatly
multiplying ,!e0s pain in &hildbearing6 as punishment for her eating the forbidden
fruit( Ce are so familiar 'ith the story that 'e seldom stop to think 'hat 6greatly
multiplied pain in &hildbearing6 means( But + 'ill ne!er forget my 'ife0s s&reams
'hile + sat outside in the 'aiting room of the hospital 'here she ga!e birth to our
first &hild(
-i!en that the idea of a pain)multiplying -od &onfli&ts so sharply 'ith that of the
lo!ing -od re&ogniAed by Christians today$ there seem to be only t'o possibilities
here( ,ither the Adam and ,!e story0s pi&ture of a sometimes 6&ruel6 -od is again
'rong( Er$ and more likely$ the author of the story ne!er intended that it should be
read as literal truth from start to finish$ 'hi&h 'ould also e%plain talk of -od0s
6'alking in the garden6(
The snake
Ce need to bear that se&ond possibility parti&ularly in mind 'hen 'e &ome no' to
&onsider the se&ond member of the &ast of the story$ the snake$ 'hi&h appears at
t'o points in -enesis 3( At the start$ 'here it talks to ,!e and persuades her to eat
some of the forbidden fruit( And later on 'here -od punishes the snake de&laring$
6=pon your belly you shall go$ and dust you shall eat all the days of your life61
meaning$ presumably$ that it still had legs 'hen talking to ,!e earlier(
There seem to be three possibilities here( Girst$ that the story is 'rong again$ that
,!e 'as not tempted by a snake at all( "e&ond$ and as abo!e$ that the story 'as
ne!er intended to be read as literally true( And third$ that there really 'as a talking
snake but that it 'as the de!il in disguise(
:any Christians opt for the third possibility$ quoting e!elation 1213 as their
reason for doing so( But many other Christians$ Catholi& or other'ise$ 'ill agree
'ith the statement in the Cate&hism of the Catholi& Chur&h that 6-enesis 3 uses
figurati!e language$ but affirms a prime!al e!ent$ a deed that took pla&e at the
beginning of the history of man(6
Adam and Eve
This brings us finally to Adam and ,!e themsel!es(
As the old Foke goes$ one thing 'e kno' for &ertain is that Adam and ,!e 'ere not
Chinese( +f a Chinese &ouple had &ome a&ross the talking snake then they 'ould
ne!er ha!e been tempted to eat the forbidden fruit( They 'ould ha!e eaten the
snake insteadH
En a more serious note$ and as mentioned in Chapter 1$ if Adam and ,!e really
'ere the !ery first man and 'oman$ &reated in 7007 B(C($ then 'e ha!e a &onfli&t
here 'ith s&ien&e0s date of some 190$000 years ago for the emergen&e of Homo
sapiens( But a possible solution &omes from the statement in -enesis 1 that -od
&reated mankind 6in his image6( Could it be that$ for a long initial period$ Homo
sapiens had similar physi&al attributes to our o'n but la&ked the 6image of -od6
'hi&h 'e ha!eI Could it be that they 'ere at first little smarter than the
2eanderthalsI
This is a&tually a hotly debated subFe&t among modern s&ientists( The Fournalist
od Caird 'rites as follo's in his book Ape :an1
+t is &lear$ from a 'ealth of ar&haeologi&al sites in ,urope and
else'here$ that by about 70$000 years ago a 'hole ne' 'orld had
been born( ?eople !ery mu&h like oursel!es had established settled
li!ing sites and it is from around that time that 'e begin to see
e!iden&e of the great e%plosion of &reati!ity symboliAed by the
proliferation of e%traordinary &a!e paintings and s&ulpture(
Jod Caird$ Ape :an$ p( 130K
"ome s&ientists ha!e suggested that this 'as the result of a spe&ial gene that
6ki&ked in6 70$000 years ago$ an idea reFe&ted by other s&ientists as 6un)
Dar'inian6( But the follo'ing statement about &a!e paintings in the <+E2
>andbook of Christian Belief hints at a different e%planation1
These !i!id and realisti& paintings sho' s&enes of animals su&h as
deer and bison$ many of them riddled 'ith the arro's and lan&es
of hunters(
2o serious ar&haeologist belie!es 'e are looking at art for art0s
sake in these hunting s&enes( Theories !ary$ of &ourse$ and in any
&ase 'e are in the area of the unpro!eable$ but it is generally
agreed that the basi& meaning of these pi&tures is ritualisti& or
magi&al( The !ie' held by many e%perts is that religious
&eremonies took pla&e around these pi&tures before hunters left the
&a!es to go and seek food for themsel!es and their families(
J<+E2 >andbook of Christian Belief$ pp( 23)27K
+f the 6great e%plosion of &reati!ity6 mentioned by Caird 'as as mu&h religious as
se&ular$ then an alternati!e e%planation is that it 'as the result of -od0s planting his
image in Homo sapiens at that time( >o'I By mo!ing that one nanometre along
the spiritual dimension to infuse our minds 'ith his intelle&t and to implant our
souls(
Atheists 'ill naturally see that last suggestion as hard to s'allo'( "o 'e &an hardly
e%pe&t to find them enthusiasti& about the t'o other main things said about Adam
and ,!e in -enesis 21 that -od &reated Adam from the dust of the ground and then
,!e from one of Adam0s ribs(
There seem to be three main possibilities here( Girst$ that the story is again 'rong$
that Adam and ,!e 'ere born in the normal 'ay from parents of some sort$
perhaps members of some pre)human spe&ies( "e&ond$ that -enesis 2 'as ne!er
intended to be read as literally true( And third$ that there is some deeper meaning to
the idea that -od &an 'hen ne&essary &reate people out of the !ery dust of the
ground( Ce 'ill &ome ba&k to that last point in Chapter 18(
,!e gets mi%ed re!ie's( Almost all early &ommentators sa' her as the one mainly
to blame( "he 'as the one 'ho 'as de&ei!ed and$ although Adam &ertainly sinned
'ith his eyes open$ it 'as eyes &louded by his lo!e for her$ 'hi&h 'as of &ourse
again her fault( But not e!eryone agrees today and t'o things must be said in ,!e0s
fa!our( That she is the only one 'ho &omes &lose to repentan&e( And that the fig)
leaf aprons to &o!er the &ouple0s nakedness 'ere &learly her idea and her
handi'ork(
:ost people$ ho'e!er$ do agree that Adam 'as the quintessential &ou&h potato( >e
soon gets bored naming the !arious animals that -od &reates and brings to him$
hen&e his 6At lastH6 'hen ,!e e!entually appears( >e lea!es it to ,!e to bring him
all his meals and$ 'hen she &omes along 'ith the forbidden fruit$ he eats it 'ithout
asking a single question( Chen -od &onfronts him$ he not only blames ,!e but
then blames -od as 'ell for ha!ing foisted her on him in the first pla&e( Ginally$
and e!en though his only punishment is that he 'ill ha!e to do some hard 'ork in
future$ unlike poor ,!e 'ho has to suffer 6greatly multiplied pain in &hildbearing6$
Adam ne!er again has anything to say about -od( +t is left to ,!e to thank -od
'hen Cain and Abel are born( Ce might almost imagine that the Adam and ,!e
story 'as 'ritten by a 'omanH
Chapter # The Frame$or% of the Adam and
Eve Stor
-enesis 2)3 presents the Adam and ,!e story in four s&enes$ pre&eded by a
prologue in -enesis 1 and follo'ed by an epilogue in -enesis 7(
Prologue
The last part of -enesis 1$ &o!ering the si%th 6day6 of Creation$ reads1
24
And -od said$ 6<et the earth bring forth li!ing &reatures a&&ording to their kinds1
&attle and &reeping things and beasts of the earth a&&ording to their kinds(6 And it
'as so (((
26
Then -od said$ 6<et us make man in our image$ after our likenessB and let them
ha!e dominion o!er the fish of the sea$ and o!er the birds of the air$ and o!er the
&attle$ and o!er all the earth (((6
27
"o -od &reated man in his o'n image ((( male and
female he &reated them(
28
And -od blessed them$ and -od said to them$ 6Be
fruitful and multiply$ and fill the earth and subdue it (((6
29
And -od said$ 6Behold$ +
ha!e gi!en you ((( e!ery plant and e!ery tree 'ith seed in its fruitB you shall ha!e
them for food(6
There are three things to note in this passage( Girst$ the order of e!ents1 animals
before humans( "e&ond$ that the a&&ount does not spe&ify 6man$ male and female6
as only one &ouple( And third$ that the humans &reated here are permitted to eat of
6e!ery tree 'ith seed in its fruit6$ 'hi&h &learly in&ludes apples(
Scene 1: The creation of Adam and God's warning about the fruit
The first half of -enesis 2 reads as follo's1
4b
+n the day that the <ED -od made the earth and the hea!ens$
5
'hen no plant of
the field 'as yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up ) for the
<ED -od had not &aused it to rain upon the earth$ and there 'as no man to till
the landB
6
but a mist 'ent up from the earth and 'atered the 'hole fa&e of the
ground )
7
then the <ED -od formed man of dust from the ground and breathed
into his nostrils the breath of lifeB and the man be&ame a li!ing being(
8
And the
<ED -od planted a garden in ,den$ in the eastB and there he put the man 'hom
he had formed(
9
And out of the ground the <ED -od made to gro' e!ery tree
that is pleasant to the sight and good for food$ the tree of life also in the midst of
the garden$ and the tree of the kno'ledge of good and e!il (((
15
The <ED -od took the man and put him in the garden of ,den to till it and keep
it(
16
And the <ED -od &ommanded the man$ saying$ 6*ou may freely eat of
e!ery tree in the gardenB
17
but of the tree of the kno'ledge of good and e!il you
shall not eat$ for on the day that you eat of it you shall die(6
There are three things to note here( Girst$ that only one man$ Adam$ is &reated(
"e&ond$ that -od intends him to be a &rop farmer( And third$ that he is not
permitted to eat the fruit of one parti&ular tree in the garden(
Scene 2: The naming of the animals and the creation of Eve
The se&ond half of -enesis 2 reads as follo's1
18
Then the <ED -od said$ 6+t is not good that the man should be aloneB + 'ill
make him a helper fit for him(6
19
"o out of the ground the <ED -od formed
e!ery beast of the field and e!ery bird of the air$ and brought them to the man to
see 'hat he 'ould &all themB and 'hate!er the man &alled e!ery li!ing &reature$
that 'as its name(
20
((( but for the man there 'as not found a helper fit for him(
21
"o
the <ED -od &aused a deep sleep to fall upon the man$ and 'hile he slept took
one of his ribs and &losed up its pla&e 'ith fleshB
22
and the rib 'hi&h the <ED
-od had taken from the man he made into a 'oman and brought her to the man(
23
Then the man said$ 6This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my fleshB she
shall be &alled Coman$ be&ause she 'as taken out of :an(6
24
Therefore a man
lea!es his father and his mother and &lea!es to his 'ife$ and they be&ome one
flesh(
25
And the man and his 'ife 'ere both naked$ and 'ere not ashamed(
There are t'o things to note in this passage( Girst$ it is surprising that &rop farmer
Adam does not leap at the &han&e to ha!e a horse to pull his plough$ or at least to
ride around on1 far more 6helpful6 than a 'omanH And se&ond$ the order of e!ents
in Creation &ontradi&ts that in -enesis 11 here man pre&edes the animals(
+ should mention here that all the Bible quotations 'hi&h + use in this book are
taken from the e!ised "tandard #ersion( +f using the 2e' +nternational #ersion$
then you 'ill find the follo'ing subtly different .and in my !ie' 'rong/
translation of the >ebre' te%t of -enesis 21131
19
2o' the <ED -od had formed out of the ground all the 'ild
animals and all the birds in the sky( >e brought them to the man to
see 'hat he 'ould name them( And 'hate!er the man &alled ea&h
li!ing &reature$ that 'as its name(
Scene : The tem!ting of Eve and the effect of eating the fruit
The first half of -enesis 3 reads as follo's1
1
2o' the serpent 'as more subtle than any other 'ild &reature that the <ED -od
had made( >e said to the 'oman$ 6Did -od say$ 0*ou shall not eat of any tree of
the garden0I6
2
And the 'oman said to the serpent$ 6Ce may eat of the fruit of the
trees of the gardenB
3
but -od said$ 0*ou shall not eat of the fruit of the tree 'hi&h is
in the midst of the garden$ neither shall you tou&h it$ lest you die0(6
4
But the serpent
said to the 'oman$ 6*ou 'ill not die(
5
Gor -od kno's that 'hen you eat of it your
eyes 'ill be opened$ and you 'ill be like -od$ kno'ing good and e!il(6
6
"o 'hen
the 'oman sa' that the tree 'as good for food$ and that it 'as a delight to the
eyes$ and that the tree 'as to be desired to make one 'ise$ she took of its fruit and
ateB and she also ga!e some to her husband$ and he ate(
7
Then the eyes of both 'ere
opened$ and they kne' that they 'ere nakedB and they se'ed fig lea!es together
and made themsel!es aprons(
8
And they heard the sound of the <ED -od 'alking in the garden in
the &ool of the day$ and the man and his 'ife hid themsel!es from the presen&e of
the <ED -od among the trees of the garden(
9
But the <ED -od &alled to the
man$ and said to him$ 6Chere are youI6
10
And he said$ 6+ heard the sound of thee in
the garden$ and + 'as afraid$ be&ause + 'as nakedB and + hid myself(6
11
>e said$
6Cho told you that you 'ere nakedI >a!e you eaten of the tree of 'hi&h +
&ommanded you not to eatI6
12
The man said$ 6The 'oman 'hom thou ga!est to be
'ith me$ she ga!e me fruit of the tree and + ate(6
13
Then the <ED -od said to the
'oman$ 6Chat is this that you ha!e doneI6 The 'oman said$ 6The serpent
beguiled me$ and + ate(6
Three things to note here( Girst$ the fa&t that the snake &an talk( "e&ond$ the
dramati& effe&t 'hi&h eating the forbidden fruit has on Adam and ,!e( And third$
the 'ay that neither of them seeks -od0s forgi!eness(
Scene ": God's !unishment of the snake and of Adam and Eve
The se&ond half of -enesis 3 reads as follo's1
14
The <ED -od said to the serpent$ 6Be&ause you ha!e done this$ &ursed are you
abo!e all &attle$ and abo!e all 'ild animalsB upon your belly you shall go$ and dust
you shall eat all the days of your life (((6
16
To the 'oman he said$ 6+ 'ill greatly multiply your pain in &hildbearingB in pain
you shall bring forth your &hildren$ yet your desire shall be for your husband$ and
he shall rule o!er you(6
17
And to Adam he said$ 6Be&ause you ha!e listened to the !oi&e of your 'ife$ and
ha!e eaten of the tree of 'hi&h + &ommanded you$ 0*ou shall not eat of it$0 &ursed is
the ground be&ause of youB in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your lifeB
18
thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to youB and you shall eat ((( plants of the
field(
19
+n the s'eat of your fa&e you shall eat bread till you return to the ground$
for out of it you 'ere takenB you are dust$ and to dust you shall return(6
20
The man &alled his 'ife0s name ,!e$ be&ause she 'as the mother of all li!ing(
21
And the <ED -od made for Adam and for his 'ife garments of skins$ and
&lothed them(
22
Then the <ED -od said$ 6Behold$ the man has be&ome like one
of us$ kno'ing good and e!ilB and no'$ lest he put forth his hand and take also of
the tree of life$ and eat$ and li!e for e!er6 )
23
Therefore the <ED -od sent him
forth from the garden$ to till the ground from 'hi&h he 'as taken(
24
>e dro!e out
the manB and at the east of the garden of ,den he pla&ed the &herubim$ and a
flaming s'ord ((( to guard the 'ay to the tree of life(
The key thing to remember here is the pre&ise detail of the 'ays in 'hi&h -od
punishes Adam and ,!e(
E!ilogue
The first half of -enesis 7$ the Cain and Abel story$ reads as follo's1
1
2o' Adam kne' ,!e his 'ife$ and she &on&ei!ed and bore Cain$ saying$ 6+ ha!e
gotten a man 'ith the help of the <ED(6
2
And again$ she bore his brother Abel(
2o' Abel 'as a keeper of sheep$ and Cain a tiller of the ground(
3
+n the &ourse of
time Cain brought to the <ED an offering of the fruit of the ground$ and Abel
brought of the firstlings of his flo&k and of their fat portions( And the <ED had
regard for Abel and his offering$
5
but for Cain and his offering he had no regard( "o
Cain 'as !ery angry$ and his &ountenan&e fell (((
8
Cain said to Abel his brother$ 6<et us go out into the field(6 And 'hen they 'ere in
the field$ Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him(
9
Then the <ED
said to Cain$ 6Chere is Abel your brotherI6 >e said$ 6+ do not kno'B am + my
brother0s keeperI6
10
And the <ED said$ 6Chat ha!e you doneI The !oi&e of your
brother0s blood is &rying to me from the ground(
11
And no' you are &ursed from the
ground (((
12
Chen you till the ground$ it shall no longer yield to you its strengthB
you shall be a fugiti!e and a 'anderer on the earth(6
13
Cain said to the <ED$ 6:y
punishment is greater than + &an bear ((( 'hoe!er finds me 'ill slay me(6 (((
16
Then
Cain 'ent a'ay from the presen&e of the <ED$ and d'elt in the land of 2od$ east
of ,den(
17
Cain kne' his 'ife$ and she &on&ei!ed and bore ,no&h(
Gi!e things to note here( Girst$ the identifi&ation of Abel as a herder and Cain as a
&rop farmer( "e&ond$ the des&ription of 'heat as 6the fruit of the ground6( Third$
the e%tremely lenient punishment imposed on Cain .as &ompared 'ith that meted
out to ,!e/( Gourth$ Cain0s fear that 6'hoe!er finds him 'ill slay him6( And fifth$
the mention of Cain0s 'ife$ raising the question of 'here she &ame from(
Ginally$ let me ask you a question1 Did you noti&e that in the prologue from
-enesis 1 -od is &alled 6-od6$ that in "&enes 1)7 from -enesis 2)3 he is &alled
6The <ED -od6 and that in the epilogue from -enesis 7 he is &alled 6The
<ED6I Ce shall return to this point in Chapter 3(
Chapter & '(e"tion" a)o(t the Adam and Eve
Stor
:y sear&h for the true Adam and ,!e story began after the follo'ing &on!ersation
+ had 'ith my 'ife in 13391
Cife1 Chy do you see the Adam and ,!e story as literally trueI
:e1 Be&ause it is in the Bible(
Cife1 But it doesn0t make sense( Chy did -od de&ide to test Adam and
,!e by planting that tree in the gardenI Chy did he not foresee
that they 'ould fail their testI Chy$ if he kne' they 'ould fail the
test$ did he still go ahead 'ith itI And 'hy$ kno'ing that Adam
and ,!e 'ould fail and yet still going ahead 'ith the test$ did he
then punish them so harshly after they did indeed failI
+f + had kno'n then 'hat + kno' no'$ + 'ould ha!e replied that my 'ife 'as
'orking from the 'rong premise$ that Cal!in 'as mistaken 'hen suggesting in the
+nstitutes of the Christian eligion that -od0s 'arning not to eat the forbidden fruit
'as intended to 6pro!e and e%er&ise6 Adam0s faith( But all + &ould do at the time
'as to sit 'ith my mouth open as my 'ife smiled$ stood up and 'alked out of the
room(
:y 'ife 'as$ ho'e!er$ right in the broader sense that the traditional understanding
of the Adam and ,!e story does raise questions( + shall begin 'ith questions raised
by s&ien&e and Bible s&holarship and then look some &ommon sense issues( But$ to
ensure that 'e do not lose fo&us$ + shall &lose this &hapter and this +ntrodu&tion by
e%plaining 'hy$ despite all this$ + still insist that the story &arries the signature of
-od(
#uestions raised by science
The first question raised by s&ientists is 'hether there 'as e!er a !ery first man
and 'oman( +f the ans'er to this is negati!e$ then the &onfli&t bet'een the Bible
date of ;$000 years ago for Adam and ,!e and s&ien&e0s date of 190$000 years ago
for the emergen&e of Homo sapiens be&omes irrele!ant( Er rather$ as mentioned in
Chapter 2$ date be&omes rele!ant only to the question of 'hen Homo sapiens
really took on the 6image of -od61 190$000 years ago or !ery mu&h laterI
A se&ond question raised by s&ientists relates to the e!iden&e from D2A studies
that 'e share a &ommon an&estor 'ith &himpanAees$ gorillas and orang)utans 'ho
li!ed some 1; million years ago( "&ientists see this as pro!ing &on&lusi!ely that
none of our human an&estors 'ere &reated from the dust of the ground(
A third question raised by s&ientists relates to the snake( "nakes ha!e ne!er talked
and ha!e al'ays 6gone upon their bellies6( There are some reptiles 'hi&h ha!e lost
their legs o!er the &ourse of time$ su&h as the slo')'orm( But these animals are
legless liAards$ not snakes(
A fourth and final question raised by s&ientists relates to the statement that -od
punished ,!e by 6greatly multiplying her pain in &hildbearing6( "&ien&e gi!es a
!ery different e%planation for the e%treme pain 'hi&h human mothers suffer 'hen
gi!ing birth( od Caird notes in his book Ape :an that 'alking upright and being
t'o)legged1
requires &hanges in the pel!is 'hi&h make &hildbirth more diffi&ult
and dangerous for humans than for any other kno'n spe&ies(
#uestions raised by $ible scholarshi!
The first question raised by Bible s&holars is 'hether -enesis 'as 'ritten by
:oses in around the 13th &entury B(C( or 'as put into its present form as late the
4th &entury B(C( "&holars ha!e assembled a 'ealth of e!iden&e for their !ie' that
the first fi!e books of the Bible as 'e ha!e them today 'ere all &ompiled in the 4th
&entury B(C( from four earlier and no')lost do&uments 'hi&h they label 6J6$ 6E6$
6D6 and 6P6(
A se&ond question raised by Bible s&holars relates to the &ontradi&tions bet'een
-enesis 1 and -enesis 2$ for e%ample o!er the order of e!ents in Creation1 animals
before humans or humans before the other animalsI + mentioned in Chapter 1 the
s&holarly !ie' that$ 'hen -enesis 'as put into its present form$ the -enesis 1
a&&ount 'as taken from 6P6 'hile the -enesis 2 a&&ount 'as taken from 6J6( "o
some s&holars question 'hether the 6man$ male and female6 of -enesis 1 should
really be equated to the Adam and ,!e of -enesis 2)3(
%ommon sense issues
The first question raised by &ommon sense relates to the ob!ious physi&al
similarities bet'een humans$ apes .&himpanAees$ gorillas$ orang)utans and
gibbons/$ monkeys and lemurs( Chy did none of the Bible authors e!er pi&k up on
this pointI Ce &an only guess that this 'as be&ause none of them e!er sa' any of
the other &reatures( +f they had$ then surely one of them 'ould ha!e suggested$ as
'e find in the 5e'ish :idrash$ that before Adam there 'ere semi)human beings
6'ith tails like monkeys6(
This said$ though$ the issue of 'hether a !ery first man &ould a&tually ha!e been
&reated from the dust of the ground is best left to s&ien&e( "o the se&ond question
'hi&h &ommon sense raises is 'hether -od 'ould really ha!e &reated ,!e from
one of Adam0s ribs(
Common sense tells us that being &reated from one of Adam0s ribs 'ould ha!e
made ,!e a 6&lone6 of Adam( "o she 'ould not ha!e been female( And e!en if she
'as female$ she 'ould ha!e been Adam0s sister$ making this a !ery strange 'ay to
go about laun&hing the human ra&e( <a's against in&est arose mainly be&ause of
the obser!ation$ long before anything 'as kno'n about D2A$ that marriages of
!ery &lose relati!es often led to serious problems for the resulting offspring( "o
'hy did -od not make things infinitely simpler by making ,!e from 6the dust of
the ground6 in the same 'ay as he had made Adam .and the other animals/I
"till on the subFe&t of in&est$ the third question 'hi&h &ommon sense raises relates
to Cain0s 'ife$ first mentioned after Cain mo!es to 2od follo'ing his murder of
Abel( There are t'o possibilities here( ,ither Cain married his sister and took her
'ith him$ or he 'ent alone to 2od and married someone there( The first possibility
in!ol!es in&est( And the se&ond possibility in!ol!es an e!en greater problem$ one
hinted at by Cain0s mention of his fear that 6'hoe!er finds me 'ill slay me6( +f
there 'ere already other$ unrelated people li!ing in 2od$ then ho' &ould Adam and
,!e ha!e been the !ery first man and 'omanI Ce 'ill &ome ba&k to the matter of
Cain0s 'ife in Chapter 13(
A fourth question raised by &ommon sense is that of -od0s 'isdom in planting the
tree of 6the kno'ledge of good and e!il6 in the garden in the first pla&e( 2o lo!ing
parent deliberately puts a son or daughter 'ithin arm0s rea&h of e%treme danger( 2o
sensible parent tells a &hild$ 6Don0t tou&h thatH6 and then 'alks a'ayB to do so is to
invite disobedien&e( And if -od is -od$ then 'ho needs a tree of the kno'ledge of
good and e!ilI
"till on the subFe&t of the forbidden fruit$ a fifth question raised by &ommon sense
&on&erns the dramati& effe&t 'hi&h eating the fruit has on Adam and ,!e( Ef
&ourse$ in mankind0s earliest days of gathering nuts and berries$ there must ha!e
been times 'hen the 'rong sorts of berries 'ill ha!e harmed those 'ho ate them(
But e!en though some plants do &ontain nar&oti& substan&es$ &ommon sense reFe&ts
the idea that eating t'o pie&es of fruit plu&ked dire&tly from a tree &ould suddenly
ha!e made the &ouple a'are that they 'ere naked(
A si%th question raised by &ommon sense relates to the 'ay -od punishes ,!e(
Adam is punished 'ith ha!ing to do some hard 'ork for a &hange( Cain is
punished .for ha!ing murdered his brotherH/ by mere banishment( "o poor ,!e0s
punishment seems both harsh and unfair(
A se!enth and final question raised by &ommon sense asks 'hy -od did not simply
turn the disobedient Adam and ,!e ba&k into dust and start again 'ith a fresh
&ouple( This &ould hardly ha!e been be&ause -od 'as too kind)hearted to destroy
them( After all$ in the Glood story in -enesis ;)3$ he did not hesitate to dro'n
e!eryone apart from 2oah and his immediate family( "o 'hy did -od perse!ere
'ith Adam and ,!eI
&The 'ord of God&
egardless of 'hat the ans'ers might be to the abo!e questions$ 'hether those
raised by s&ientists and Bible s&holars or those arising from pure &ommon sense$
'e should not imagine that the Adam and ,!e story has been 6dispro!ed6( As 'e
shall see later$ 'hat s&ien&e and s&holarship ha!e done is to shed ne' light on the
story( And ho'e!er mu&h our &ommon sense may be offended by some aspe&ts of
the Adam and ,!e story$ &ommon sense also leads us to a &ru&ially important
point(
The t'o likeliest 'ays in 'hi&h the Adam and ,!e story &ame to be 'ritten are
either that :oses 'rote it .perhaps at -od0s di&tation/ in the 13th &entury B(C( or
that a 5e'ish priest in Babylon re'rote it in the 4th &entury B(C( from an earlier
!ersion( ,ither 'ay$ the author of the story &ould not ha!e been a total idiot( En the
&ontrary$ he 'ill ha!e been one of the best)edu&ated men of his time and .in the
latter &ase/ part of a team of s&holars engaged in tidying up the an&ient 5e'ish
s&riptures(
+t follo's$ therefore$ that the author must ha!e had good reasons for framing
matters in the 'ay he did( easons 'hi&h$ if 'e &an un&o!er them$ 'ill e%plain all
the oddities about ,!e0s being made from one of Adam0s ribs$ about the fruit$ about
the snake and about the harshness of a -od 'ho so unfairly 6greatly multiplies
,!e0s pain in &hildbearing6(
Abo!e all 'e must remember that$ regardless of 'ho 'rote the Adam and ,!e
story$ the entire Bible &arries the signature of -od( Ce may not like e!erything 'e
read in the Bible and -od himself probably sighs o!er some of the harsher
passages( But the Bible is 6the Cord of -od6 and the important thing is to read it
'ith hearts open to the true lo!ing -od(
PART II EARL* C+RISTIAN ,IE-S OF T+E
STOR*
Chapter . /e"(" and the Adam and Eve Stor
+n these ne%t four &hapters 'e 'ill look at the !ie's of four early Christians on the
Adam and ,!e story( + begin$ naturally$ 'ith the !ie's of 5esus and here + need to
start by saying something about 5esus himself(
That 5esus li!ed$ roughly bet'een 7 B(C( and 30 A(D($ is not in dispute( Ta&itus$
the oman historian 'ho li!ed around 44)119 A(D($ re&ords in his Annals that after
the -reat Gire of ome in ;7 A(D(1
2ero fastened the guilt and infli&ted the most e%quisite tortures on
a &lass hated for their abominations$ &alled Christians by the
popula&e( Christus$ from 'hom the name had its origin$ suffered
the e%treme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of
one of our pro&urators$ ?ontius ?ilatus ((( JTa&itus$ Annals$ 14177K
Chat is in dispute is 'ho 5esus 'as( But all Christians firmly belie!e that 5esus
'as the "on of -od and that the 'ords as&ribed to 5esus himself in the -ospels
really did &ome from his lips( "o 'hat he is re&orded as ha!ing said about the
Adam and ,!e story is &learly of great importan&e(
(esus' sole reference to the Adam and Eve story
-i!en the maFor role that the Adam and ,!e story plays in Christian thinking$ it is
surprising that 5esus referred to it on only one o&&asion$ re&orded in almost
identi&al terms in :ark 1012)3 and :atthe' 1313)31
And ?harisees &ame up and in order to test him asked$ 6+s it la'ful
for a man to di!or&e his 'ifeI6 >e ans'ered them$ 6Chat did
:oses &ommand youI6 They said$ 6:oses allo'ed a man to 'rite
a &ertifi&ate of di!or&e$ and to put her a'ay(6 But 5esus said to
them$ 6Gor your hardness of heart he 'rote you this
&ommandment( But from the beginning of &reation$ 0-od made
them male and female(0 0For this reason a man shall leave his
father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall
become one flesh.0 "o they are no longer t'o but one flesh( Chat
therefore -od has Foined together$ let not man put asunder(6
Chat is e!en more surprising is that this sole referen&e$ sho'n in itali&s$ is to
-enesis 2127( 5esus made no mention of the -arden of ,den$ the fruit$ the
temptation$ the sin or the punishment of Adam and ,!e( And this prompts t'o
questions( Girst$ 'hether 5esus0 quoting -enesis 2127 should be seen as his
authenti&ating -enesis 2)3 as a 'hole( And se&ond$ 'hether there is some reason
for 5esus0 relati!e silen&e on this subFe&t(
Gor both these questions$ a good starting point is the follo'ing passage in the
<+E2 >andbook of Christian Belief1
The attitude of 5esus to the Eld Testament must be de&isi!e for the
Christian( +t is &lear that 5esus a&&epted it as a true and faithful
re!elation of -od( The idea that the Eld Testament sho's a harsh
-od$ different from the lo!ing -od of the 2e' Testament$ is
denied by 5esus( Ce &annot reFe&t his attitude here 'ithout
undermining his 'hole moral and spiritual authority(
+n fa&t all the 2e' Testament 'riters presuppose the !alidity of
the moral and spiritual tea&hing of the Eld(
J<+E2 >andbook of Christian Belief$ p( 183K
'as (esus authenticating the entire Adam and Eve story)
En the first question$ the <+E2 >andbook0s impli&ation here is that 5esus0 mention
of -enesis 2127 means that he 'as indeed authenti&ating the 'hole of -enesis 2)3(
And many Christians 'ill go e!en further by quoting 5esus0 'ords in :atthe'
4119)181
Think not that + ha!e &ome to abolish the la' and the prophetsB +
ha!e &ome not to abolish them but to fulfil them( Gor truly$ + say to
you$ till hea!en and earth pass a'ay$ not an iota$ not a dot$ 'ill
pass from the la' until all is a&&omplished(
They 'ill say that 6the la' and the prophets6 means the 'hole of the Eld
Testament$ e!ery single 'ord of 'hi&h 5esus 'as thereby !alidating(
These !ie's &all for t'o &omments( En the one hand$ e!en if 'e read :atthe'
4119)18 in the 'ay suggested$ 5esus 'as simply saying that the te%t of the Adam
and ,!e story in -enesis 2)3 'as e%a&tly as its author 'rote it( >e 'as not saying
that the story 'as ne&essarily literally true( And on the other hand$ 'e should take
a&&ount of the &onte%t both of :atthe' 4119)18 .'here 5esus 'as &ommenting on
:oses0 Ten Commandments/ and of :ark 1012)3 .quoted earlier on in this
&hapter/( Chat 5esus 'as really saying 'as that he had not &ome to abolish the
moral rules in the Eld Testament but rather to reinfor&e them(
'hy was (esus relatively silent on the Adam and Eve story)
En the se&ond question$ 'hether there is some reason for 5esus0 relati!e silen&e on
the Adam and ,!e story$ the abo!e <+E2 >andbook passage is some'hat
misleading( +t is true that some books in the 2e' Testament paint the same pi&ture
of -od as the one found in the Eld Testament$ that of a -od 'ho is both punishing
and lo!ing( But the pi&ture of -od 'hi&h 5esus presented in his o'n 'ords in the
-ospels is !ery different( 5esus totally ruled out all suggestion of a -od 'ho
punishes people in this life(
+n the !ie' of many 5e's of 5esus0 time$ and many Christians today$ -od punishes
all serious sins 'ith misfortunes of some sort( But 5esus dismissed any idea of a
link bet'een sin and misfortune in t'o passages(
Girst$ <uke 1311)41
Do you think that the -alileans 'hose blood ?ilate had mingled
'ith their sa&rifi&es$ or those 18 killed 'hen the to'er in "iloam
fell$ 'ere 'orse offenders than all the othersI + tell you$ 2o(
"e&ond$ 5ohn 312)31
>is dis&iples asked him$ 6abbi$ 'ho sinned$ this man or his
parents$ that he 'as born blindI6 5esus ans'ered$ 6+t 'as not that
this man sinned$ or his parents6(
+n this same !ein$ 'e find that 5esus also made no referen&e 'hatsoe!er to those
parts of the Cain and Abel$ 2oah Glood and "odom and -omorrah stories 'hi&h
speak of -od0s punishing people$ e!en though he mentioned all three stories at
!arious times(
The fa&t of the matter is that$ 'hen referring to the stories in -enesis$ 5esus 'as
not !alidating either them or their pi&ture of a punishing -od( ather$ he 'as using
them simply to get his point a&ross( Chen speaking to the &ro'ds and the dis&iples
he used these familiar stories to help them understand and remember his tea&hing(
And in debates 'ith the ?harisees$ he 'as beating them at their o'n game by
referring to passages in their s&riptures to &ut the ground from under them(
Chy am + highlighting 5esus0 relati!e silen&e on the Adam and ,!e storyI Be&ause
5esus supplanted e!erything in -enesis 2)3$ apart from that one !erse -enesis
2127$ 'ith a brand ne' story of his o'n(
(esus' !arable of the 'icked Tenants
5esus0 parable of the Ci&ked Tenants is found in :ark 1211)31
A man planted a !ineyard$ and set a hedge around it$ and dug a pit
for the 'ine press$ and built a to'er$ and let it out to tenants$ and
'ent into another &ountry( Chen the time &ame$ he sent a ser!ant
to the tenants$ to get from them some of the fruit of the !ineyard(
And they took him and beat him$ and sent him a'ay empty)
handed( Again he sent to them another ser!ant$ and they 'ounded
him in the head$ and treated him shamefully( And he sent another$
and him they killedB and so 'ith many others$ some they beat and
some they killed( >e still had one other$ a belo!ed sonB finally he
sent him to them$ saying$ 6They 'ill respe&t my son(6 But those
tenants said to one another$ 6This is the heir$ let us kill him$ and
the inheritan&e 'ill be ours(6 And they took him and killed him
and &ast him out of the !ineyard(
Chat 'ill the o'ner of the !ineyard doI >e 'ill &ome and destroy
the tenants$ and gi!e the !ineyard to others(
The traditional !ie' &orre&tly sees the ser!ants sent to &olle&t the fruit as the Eld
Testament prophets and the o'ner0s son as 5esus himself( But 'hen 'e &ompare
this parable 'ith the Adam and ,!e story se!eral similarities ) and one key
differen&e ) make it espe&ially signifi&ant(
The similarities are ob!ious enough( +n both &ases a gardenL!ineyard is planted and
then 6leased out6 to people on stri&t &ondition that they meet &ertain requirements
'ith regard to the fruit( And in both &ases the people in!ol!ed break the terms of
the 6lease6$ for&ing -odLthe !ineyard o'ner to take a&tion( The one key differen&e
is that in -enesis 2)3 -od seemingly &omes storming into the garden and$ be&ause
Adam and ,!e do not repent at on&e$ he punishes them se!erely( Chereas in :ark
12 the o'ner gi!es the tenants &han&e after &han&e to repent(
"o the Ci&ked Tenants parable has a dual meaning( En the one hand$ it indeed
refers to the sending of the prophets and then finally to the sending of 5esus( And$
on the other hand$ it side)lines the Adam and ,!e story1 taking us a'ay from the
apparent idea of a -od 'ho storms in and punishesB and portraying instead a -od
'ho &omes into our hearts quietly$ tou&hing our &ons&ien&es and urging us time
and again to repent(
These t'o separate meanings &ome together in the final 'ords of the parable
.:ark 1213/1
Chat 'ill the o'ner of the !ineyard doI >e 'ill &ome and destroy
the tenants$ and gi!e the !ineyard to others(
This is &ertainly 'hat a human !ineyard o'ner 'ould do( But 5esus0 real question
'as1 Chat 'ill -od do after his "on is killedI
The early Chur&h &learly thought that$ like the !ineyard o'ner$ -od 'ould &ome
and destroy those 'ho had killed 5esus( Er rather that$ ha!ing raised 5esus from the
dead$ -od 'ould soon send him ba&k to 'reak all the horrifi& mayhem spelt out in
the Book of e!elation( But the early Chur&h had got things 'rong( +t had
o!erlooked the point that -enesis 2)3 and :ark 1211)3 are both primarily about
repentan&e( And had misunderstood the nature of -od1 a lo!ing Gather -od 'hose
sole purpose in sending 5esus 'as to urge e!eryone to belie!e and repent(
Chapter 0 Pa(1 and the Adam and Eve
Stor
+n the first de&ades after 5esus0 &ru&ifi%ion$ the leading figure in the ne' Christian
Chur&h 'as the apostle ?aul( >e seems to ha!e regarded -enesis 2)3 as literally
true in e!ery 'ay and often referred to it in his ,pistles$ sometimes to support his
!ie's on relations bet'een the se%es and sometimes to dra' a &ontrast bet'een
Adam and 5esus(
Paul's views on relations between the se*es
The +llustrated Bible Di&tionary0s arti&le on Adam subdi!ides the !ie's 'hi&h ?aul
dre' from -enesis 2)3 on relations bet'een the se%es into t'o &ategories( En the
one hand$ !ie's 'hi&h ?aul dre' from -enesis 2127 .6Therefore a man lea!es his
father and his mother and &lea!es to his 'ife$ and they be&ome one flesh6/( And on
the other hand$ !ie's 'hi&h ?aul based on the &laim in -enesis 219$21)22 that -od
&reated Adam first and then ,!e se&ond(
+iews drawn from Genesis 2,2"
?aul0s ,pistles refer t'i&e to -enesis 2127( Girst$ 1 Corinthians ;114)1;1
Do you not kno' that your bodies are members of ChristI "hall +
therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a
prostituteI 2e!erH Do you not kno' that he 'ho Foins himself to a
prostitute be&omes one body 'ith herI Gor$ as it is 'ritten$ 6The
t'o shall be&ome one flesh(6
"e&ond$ ,phesians 4131)32 'here ?aul quotes -enesis 2127 and adds1
This mystery is a profound one$ and + am saying that it refers to
Christ and the &hur&h(
As noted in Chapter 4$ -enesis 2127 is the only !erse 'hi&h 5esus e!er referred to
in the entire Adam and ,!e story( And gi!en that 5esus quoted this !erse to
reinfor&e his &ondemnation of adultery in any form$ talking spe&ifi&ally about a
man and 'ife be&oming 6one flesh6$ it 'ould seem that ?aul0s use of it in both the
abo!e passages 'as quite a stret&h(
2e!ertheless$ the E%ford Bible Commentary remarks as follo's on 1 Corinthians
;114)1; and ,phesians 4131)321
?aul &annot &on&ede that our present 0natural bodies0 are irrele!ant
to Christian &ommitment( En the &ontrary$ they are 0members0 )
literally limbs ) of Christ .!( 14/$ so that the 'ay 'e handle them
ine!itably dra's Christ into our a&ti!ities( ?aul e%ploits this notion
as far as possible by a no!el appli&ation of -enesis 2127 .0the t'o
shall be&ome one flesh0/ to all se%ual unions$ not Fust marriage(
The idea of 0the t'o be&ome one flesh0 in!ites Jin ,phesians 4128)
33K a t'ofold &orollary1 that a healthy lo!e of the other is
inseparable from a healthy respe&t for oneself ((( and that the lo!e
of Christ sustains the mutual lo!e of husband and 'ife 'ithin the
&orporate &onte%t of the &hur&h$ of their being indi!idually and
Fointly members of his body the &hur&h(
JE%ford Bible Commentary$ pp( 1118$1199K
+iews drawn from Genesis 2,-.21/22
?aul used the &laim in -enesis 219$21)22 that -od &reated Adam before ,!e to
support$ abo!e all$ his idea of 6male headship6( >e 'rote1
The head of e!ery man is Christ$ the head of a 'oman is her
husband$ and the head of Christ is -od .1 Corinthians 1113/(
The husband is the head of the 'ife as Christ is the head of the
&hur&h .,phesians 4123/(
The 'omen should keep silen&e in the &hur&hes( Gor they are not
permitted to speak$ but should be subordinate$ as e!en the la'
says( +f there is anything they desire to kno'$ let them ask their
husbands at home .1 Corinthians 17137)34/(
<et a 'oman learn in silen&e 'ith all submissi!eness( + permit no
'oman to tea&h or ha!e authority o!er men .1 Timothy 2111)12/(
?aul0s spe&ifi& statements Fustifying these !ie's are as follo's1
A man M is the image and glory of -odB but 'oman is the glory
of man( Gor man 'as not made from 'oman$ but 'oman from
man( 2either 'as man &reated for 'oman$ but 'oman for man .1
Corinthians 1119)3/(
Gor Adam 'as formed first$ then ,!eB and Adam 'as not de&ei!ed$
but the 'oman 'as de&ei!ed and be&ame a transgressor( *et
'oman 'ill be sa!ed through bearing &hildren$ if she &ontinues in
faith and lo!e and holiness$ 'ith modesty .1 Timothy 2113)14/(
That last .and rather strange/ remark suggests that ?aul0s thinking on 6male
headship6 'as also based partly on -enesis 311;1
+ 'ill greatly multiply your pain in &hildbearingB in pain you shall
bring forth &hildren$ yet your desire shall be for your husband$ and
he shall rule o!er you(
Paul's contrast between Adam and (esus
En the Adam and 5esus &ontrast$ the +llustrated Bible Di&tionary 'rites1
The prin&ipal use of the figure of Adam in the ?auline literature is
in the &ontrast of Adam and Christ$ J'ithK more emphasis on the
unlikeness in the midst of the likeness of Adam to Christ(
J+llustrated Bible Di&tionary$ p( 14K
The first of the t'o key passages here is 1 Corinthians 14121)23$74)731
Gor as by a man JAdamK &ame death$ by a man J5esusK has &ome
also the resurre&tion of the dead( Gor as in Adam all die$ so also in
Christ shall all be made ali!e( But ea&h in his o'n order1 Christ the
first fruits$ then at his &oming those 'ho belong to Christ(
Thus it is 'ritten$ 6The first man Adam be&ame a li!ing being6
J-enesis 219KB the last Adam J5esusK be&ame a life)gi!ing spirit(
But it is not the spiritual 'hi&h is first but the physi&al$ and then
the spiritual( The first man 'as from the earth$ a man of dustB the
se&ond man is from hea!en( As 'as the man of dust$ so are those
'ho are of the dustB and as is the man of hea!en$ so are those 'ho
are of hea!en( 5ust as 'e ha!e borne the image of the man of dust$
'e shall also bear the image of the man of hea!en(
The +llustrated Bible Di&tionary0s arti&le on Adam &omments here1
Girst$ in !!( 21)23$ ?aul uses Jthe Adam)Christ &ontrastK to sho'
that the resurre&tion of 5esus$ 'hi&h the Corinthians a&&ept$ is a
pledge that 0all0 'ill share a like destiny$ Fust as all die 0in Adam0B it
is not that all died 'hen Adam diedB rather all no' die like him(
Then the same &ontrast is pi&ked up again in !!( 74)73B the
&ontrast here is bet'een the physi&al nature of Adam$ 'hi&h 'e all
no' share$ and the spiritual body pledged to us at the end by !irtue
of Christ0s resurre&tion( "ome at Corinth$ o!er)&onfident be&ause
of their spiritual gifts$ needed to be reminded that they 'ere still
part of an age and a humanity dominated by death(
?aul0s se&ond key passage here is omans 4112)211
Therefore as sin &ame into the 'orld through one man JAdamK and
death through sin$ and so death spread to all men be&ause all men
sinned ) sin indeed 'as in the 'orld before the la' 'as gi!en$ but
sin is not &ounted 'here there is no la'( Death reigned from Adam
to :oses$ e!en o!er those 'hose sins 'ere not like those of Adam$
'ho 'as a type of the one J5esusK 'ho 'as to &ome(
But the free gift is not like the trespass( Gor if many died through
one man0s trespass$ mu&h more ha!e the gra&e of -od and the free
gift in the gra&e of that one man 5esus Christ abounded for many(
And the free gift is not like the effe&t of that one man0s sin( Gor the
Fudgment follo'ing one trespass brought &ondemnation$ but the
free gift follo'ing many trespasses brings Fustifi&ation( +f$ be&ause
of one man0s trespass$ death reigned through that one man$ mu&h
more 'ill those 'ho re&ei!e the abundan&e of gra&e and the free
gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man 5esus
Christ(
Then as one man0s trespass led to &ondemnation for all men$ so one
man0s a&t of righteousness leads to a&quittal and life for all men(
Gor as by one man0s disobedien&e many 'ere made sinners$ so by
one man0s obedien&e many 'ill be made righteous( <a' &ame in$
to in&rease the trespassB but 'here sin in&reased$ gra&e abounded
all the more$ so that$ as sin reigned in death$ gra&e might also reign
through righteousness to eternal life through 5esus Christ our <ord(
The +llustrated Bible Di&tionary0s arti&le on Adam &omments here1
#( 12 makes it &lear that death has not spread automati&ally to all
men as a result of Adam0s sin but rather 0be&auseLin that all men
sinned0 and thus re&ei!ed the senten&e of death in their o'n right(
+n !!( 13ff( ?aul deals 'ith the problem of those 'ho did not$ like
Adam$ ha!e an e%pli&it &ommand of -od to disobeyB yet sin they
did$ as the &ontinuing reign of death from Adam to :oses and the
&oming of the <a' sho's( Adam is 0a type of the one 'ho 'as to
&ome0 and yet the de!elopment of this typology sho's that it is
!ery largely antitheti&al and &ontrasting ((( a negati!e use of
Adam0s story( :oreo!er$ 'hereas Adam0s sin and its aftermath
form an all too purely human history of man abandoned to the
&onsequen&es of his o'n a&tions .cf( omans 1127$2;$28/$ the
Christ side of the &omparison &ontains a more than human element
'hi&h far out'eighs the negati!e side(
J+llustrated Bible Di&tionary$ pp( 14)1;K
Complementing this$ and &larifying an important point$ the E%ford Bible
Commentary remarks as follo's on omans 4112)211
?aul argues on the basis of -enesis 3 only that 0sin &ame into the
'orld through one man0( >e does not propound a theory .0original
sin0/ &on&erning the &on!eyan&e of sin$ biologi&al or other'ise$
from one generation to the ne%t( The proof of the ubiquity of sin is
the uni!ersality of its &onsequen&e1 death .!( 12B -enesis 313/( The
resurre&tion of Christ thus o!erturns death introdu&ed by Adam(
JE%ford Bible Commentary$ p( 1037K
&0riginal Sin&
Ce may not like or agree 'ith e!erything ?aul says about 'omen .+ shall return to
his !ie's in Chapters 17 and 2;/( And 'e may question the 'ay he &ontrasts Adam
and 5esus1 Chy$ 'e may ask$ does 5esus himself dra' no su&h parallelI But 'e
must remind oursel!es that$ by !irtue of their being in the Bible$ all ?aul0s !ie's
&arry the signature of -od(
6Eriginal sin6 means different things to different people but$ as 'e shall see in later
&hapters$ it is a do&trine a&&epted in some shape or form by all Christians( And$ as
'e shall see in Chapter 11$ it in fa&t re&ei!es support of sorts from s&ien&e$ 'hi&h
has pinpointed t'o o&&asions 'hen mankind &olle&ti!ely took 'hat pro!ed to be
maFor turns for the 'orse(
Chapter 2 A(3("tine and the Adam and Eve
Stor
+n this &hapter and the ne%t 'e deal 'ith t'o men 'hose !ie's on the Adam and
,!e story$ and in parti&ular on 6original sin6$ 'ere not formulated until long after
the Bible 'as 'ritten( Their ideas do not$ therefore$ &arry the signature of -od( But
the thinking of the man 'e meet in this &hapter &ontinues to hold the respe&t of all
Christians and$ as 'e shall see in Chapter 11$ e!en earns a respe&tful nod .in one
respe&t at least/ from the great s&ientist "tephen >a'king(
Augustine .347)730/ be&ame Bishop of >ippo$ on the &oast of 2orth Afri&a$ in 33;
and stayed in post until 730( The historian Cill Durant des&ribes him as 6the most
authenti&$ eloquent and po'erful !oi&e of the Age of Gaith in Christendom6 and
de&lares his book The City of -od to 6belong to the &lassi&s of the 'orld0s
literature6( >is !ie's on the Adam and ,!e story are found in Books N++$ N+++ and
N+# of The City of -od and + shall quote from the -reat Books of the Cestern
Corld translation(
Augustine's views on Genesis 2
Augustine 'rites as follo's in Book N++1
The t'o &ities Jthe earthly and the hea!enlyK originated among the
angels (((
+t is easy to see ho' mu&h better it is that -od 'as pleased to
produ&e the human ra&e from the one indi!idual 'hom >e &reated$
than if >e had originated it in se!eral men( Gor as to the other
animals$ >e &reated some solitary$ and naturally seeking lonely
pla&es ) as the eagles$ kites$ lions$ 'ol!es and su&h likeB others
gregarious$ 'hi&h herd together and prefer to li!e in &ompany ((( B
but neither &lass did >e &ause to be propagated from indi!iduals$
but &alled into being se!eral at on&e( :an$ on the other hand$
'hose nature 'as to be a mean bet'een the angeli& and bestial$ >e
&reated in su&h sort that if he remained in subFe&tion to his Creator
as his rightful <ord$ and piously kept >is Commandments$ he
should pass into the &ompany of the angels$ and obtain$ 'ithout
the inter!ention of death$ a blessed and endless immortalityB but if
he offended the <ord by a proud and disobedient use of his free
'ill$ he should be&ome subFe&t to death$ and li!e as the beasts do )
the sla!e of appetite and doomed to eternal punishment after death(
And therefore -od &reated only one single man$ not$ &ertainly$ that
he might be solitary$ bereft of all so&iety$ but that by this means
the unity of so&iety and the bond of &on&ord might be more
effe&tually &ommended to him not only by similarity of nature$
but by family affe&tion( And indeed >e did not e!en &reate the
'oman that 'as to be gi!en to him as his 'ife$ as >e &reated the
man$ but &reated her out of the man$ that the 'hole human ra&e
might deri!e from one man (((
-od$ then$ made man in >is o'n image( Gor >e &reated for him a
soul endo'ed 'ith reason and intelligen&e$ so that he might e%&el
all the &reatures of earth$ air and sea$ 'hi&h 'ere not so gifted(
JThe City of -od$ Book N++$ pp( 33;$712K
Ce see here that$ rightly or 'rongly$ Augustine equates the 6man$ male and
female6 of -enesis 1 'ith Adam and ,!e( But 'e &an &ertainly agree 'ith his !ie'
that$ 'hen -od &reated man 6in his o'n image6$ he ga!e man a nature 'hi&h 6'as
to be a mean bet'een the angeli& and bestial6(
Augustine's views on Genesis
Augustine 'rites as follo's in Book N+++1
Ce no' dis&uss the fall of the first man .'e may say of the first
men/ and of the origin and propagation of human death( Gor -od
had not made man like angels$ in su&h a &ondition that$ e!en
though they had sinned$ they &ould none the more die (((
Ce must say that the first men 'ere indeed so &reated that if they
had not sinned$ they 'ould not ha!e e%perien&ed any kind of
deathB but that$ ha!ing be&ome sinners$ they 'ere so punished 'ith
death that 'hatsoe!er sprang from their sto&k should also be
punished 'ith the same death ((( Their nature 'as deteriorated in
proportion to the greatness of the &ondemnation of their sin$ so
that 'hat e%isted as punishment in those 'ho first sinned$ be&ame
a natural &onsequen&e in their &hildren( Gor man is not produ&ed
by man$ as he 'as from the dust( Gor dust 'as the material out of
'hi&h man 'as madeB man is the parent by 'hom man is begotten(
Cherefore earth and flesh are not the same thing$ though flesh be
made of earth( But as man the parent is$ su&h is man the offspring(
+n the first man$ therefore$ there e%isted the 'hole human nature$
'hi&h 'as to be transmitted by the 'oman to posterity$ 'hen that
&onFugal union re&ei!ed the di!ine senten&e of its o'n
&ondemnationB and 'hat man 'as made$ not 'hen &reated$ but
'hen he sinned and 'as punished$ this he propagated$ so far as the
origin of sin and death are &on&erned( Gor neither by sin nor its
punishment 'as he himself redu&ed to that infantine and helpless
infirmity of body and mind 'hi&h 'e see in &hildren( Gor -od
ordained that infants should begin the 'orld as the young of beasts
begin it$ sin&e their parents had fallen to the le!el of the beasts in
the fashion of their life and of their death ((( 2ay more$ infants$ 'e
see$ are e!en feebler in the use and mo!ement of their limbs$ and
more infirm to &hoose and refuse$ than the most tender offspring of
other animals ((( To this infantine imbe&ility the first man did not
fall by his la'less presumption and Fust senten&eB but human
nature 'as in his person !itiated and altered to su&h an e%tent that
he suffered in his members the 'arring of disobedient lust$ and
be&ame subFe&t to the ne&essity of dying( And 'hat he himself had
be&ome by sin and punishment$ su&h he generated those 'hom he
begotB that is to say$ subFe&t to sin and death(
JThe City of -od$ Book N+++$ pp( 714)71;K
Among other things$ Augustine dra's a distin&tion in Book N+++ bet'een 6the first
death6 ) the normal death of uni!ersal human e%perien&e ) and 6the se&ond death6
'hi&h later befalls all but those 'ho are sa!ed by -od0s gra&e( And this leads him
on to the follo'ing statement1
-od$ the author of natures$ not !i&es$ &reated man uprightB but
man$ being of his o'n 'ill &orrupted and Fustly &ondemned$ begot
&orrupted and &ondemned &hildren( Gor 'e all 'ere in that one
man sin&e 'e all 'ere that one man$ 'ho fell into sin by the
'oman 'ho 'as made from him before the sin( Gor not yet 'as the
parti&ular form &reated and distributed to us$ in 'hi&h 'e as
indi!iduals 'ere to li!e$ but already the seminal nature 'as there
from 'hi&h 'e 'ere to be propagatedB and this being !itiated by
sin$ and bound by the &hain of death$ and Fustly &ondemned$ man
&ould not be born of man in any other state( And thus$ from the
bad use of free 'ill$ there originated a 'hole train of e!il$ 'hi&h$
'ith its &on&atenation of miseries$ &on!oys the human ra&e from
its depra!ed origin$ as from a &orrupt root$ on to the destru&tion of
the se&ond death$ 'hi&h has no end$ those only being e%&epted
'ho are freed by the gra&e of -od (((
Therefore it is agreed among all Christians 'ho truthfully hold the
Catholi& faith that 'e are subFe&t to the death of the body$ not by
the la' of nature$ by 'hi&h -od ordained no death for man$ but by
>is righteous infli&tion on a&&ount of sinB for -od$ taking
!engean&e on sin$ said to the man$ in 'hom 'e all then 'ere$
6Dust thou art$ and unto dust shalt thou return6 J-enesis 3113K(
JThe City of -od$ Book N+++$ pp( 721)722K
Ginally$ Augustine 'rites as follo's in Book N+# about the nature of the sin of
Adam and ,!e1
JThe de!ilK first tried his de&eit upon the 'oman$ making his
assault on the 'eaker part of that human allian&e$ that he might
gradually gain the 'hole$ and not supposing that the man 'ould
readily gi!e ear to him$ or be de&ei!ed$ but that he might yield to
the error of the 'oman ((( Gor not 'ithout signifi&an&e did the
apostle J?aulK say$ 6And Adam 'as not de&ei!ed$ but the 'oman
being de&ei!ed 'as in the transgression6 J1 Timothy 2117KB but he
speaks thus$ be&ause the 'oman a&&epted as true 'hat the serpent
told her$ but the man &ould not bear to be se!ered from his only
&ompanion$ e!en though this in!ol!ed a partnership in sin( >e
'as not on this a&&ount less &ulpable$ but sinned 'ith his eyes
open( And so the apostle does not say$ 6>e did not sin$6 but 6>e
'as not de&ei!ed(6 Gor he sho's that he sinned 'hen he says$ 6By
one man sin entered the 'orld6 Jomans 4112K (((
+f anyone finds a diffi&ulty in understanding 'hy other sins do not
alter human nature as it 'as altered by the transgression of those
first human beings ((( he ought not to think that that sin 'as a small
and light one be&ause it 'as &ommitted about food ((( As J-od0sK
&ommandment enFoining abstinen&e from one kind of food in the
midst of great abundan&e of other kinds 'as so easy to keep ) so
light a burden to the memory ) and$ abo!e all$ found no resistan&e
to its obser!an&e in lust$ 'hi&h only after'ards sprung up as the
penal &onsequen&e of sin$ the iniquity of !iolating it 'as all the
greater in proportion to the ease 'ith 'hi&h it might ha!e been
kept(
Eur first parents fell into open disobedien&e be&ause already they
'ere se&retly &orruptedB for the e!il a&t had ne!er been done had
not an e!il 'ill pre&eded it( And 'hat is the origin of that e!il 'ill
but prideI (((
The de!il$ then$ 'ould not ha!e ensnared man in the open and
manifest sin of doing 'hat -od had forbidden$ had man not
already begun to li!e for himself( +t 'as this that made him listen
'ith pleasure to the 'ords$ 6*e shall be as gods6 J-enesis 314K (((
Therefore ((( as in his pride JmanK had sought to be his o'n
satisfa&tion$ -od in >is Fusti&e abandoned him to himself ((( to li!e
dissatisfied 'ith himself in a hard and miserable bondage to him to
'hom by sinning he had yielded himself (((
Choe!er thinks su&h punishment either e%&essi!e or unFust sho's
his inability to measure the great iniquity of sinning 'here sin
might so easily ha!e been a!oided( Gor as Abraham0s obedien&e is
'ith Fusti&e pronoun&ed to be great$ be&ause the thing &ommanded$
to kill his son$ 'as !ery diffi&ult$ so in ?aradise the disobedien&e
'as the greater$ be&ause the diffi&ulty of that 'hi&h 'as
&ommanded 'as imper&eptible( And as the obedien&e of the
se&ond :an J5esusK 'as the more laudable be&ause >e be&ame
obedient e!en 6unto death6 J?hilippians 218K$ so the disobedien&e
of the first man 'as the more detestable be&ause he be&ame
disobedient e!en unto death(
JThe City of -od$ Book N+#$ pp( 777)77;K
Common sense is ob!iously going to question some of this( Ge' 21st &entury
people are going to belie!e that human babies are helpless at birth solely be&ause
of the sin of Adam and ,!e( Er that$ if the &ouple had not sinned$ neither they nor
all the generations of mankind bet'een them and us 'ould ha!e died( But
Augustine0s analysis of the story is &lear and thoughtful and ser!es as a useful
pre&edent for the 'ay that 'e in the 21st &entury should &ondu&t our sear&h for the
true story(
Chapter 4 Ca1vin and the Adam and Eve
Stor
Augustine0s !ie's on -enesis 2)3 'ere unquestioned for o!er a thousand years
after his death( The only signifi&ant &riti&ism of his !ie's &ame in fa&t from his
&ontemporary ?elagius 'ho argued that there 'as no original sin and no fall of
man and 'as &ondemned as a hereti& in 731(
+n 1419 :artin <uther laun&hed the ?rotestant eformation and in due &ourse 5ohn
Cal!in .1403)14;7/ took a fresh look at Augustine0s !ie's( + therefore no' quote
and &omment on a number of passages in Chapter + of 6Book "e&ond6 of Cal!in0s
book +nstitutes of the Christian eligion$ using the -reat Books of the Cestern
Corld translation(
God's !rohibition was &meant to !rove and e*ercise& Adam's faith
Cal!in 'rites as follo's in "e&tion 7 of Chapter +1
As the a&t 'hi&h -od punished so se!erely must ha!e been not
a tri!ial fault but a heinous &rime$ it 'ill be ne&essary to attend to
the parti&ular nature of the sin 'hi&h produ&ed Adam0s fall$ and
pro!oked -od to infli&t su&h fearful !engean&e on the 'hole
human ra&e( The &ommon idea of sensual intemperan&e is &hildish(
The sum and substan&e of all !irtues &ould not &onsist in
abstinen&e from a single fruit amid a general abundan&e of e!ery
deli&a&y that &ould be desired ((( Ce must therefore look deeper
than sensual intemperan&e( The prohibition to tou&h the tree of the
kno'ledge of good and e!il 'as a trial of obedien&e$ that Adam$
by obser!ing it$ might pro!e his 'illing submission to the
&ommand of -od( Gor the !ery term sho's the end of the pre&ept
to ha!e been to keep him &ontented 'ith his lot$ and not allo' him
arrogantly to aspire beyond it( The promise$ 'hi&h ga!e him hope
of eternal life as long as he should eat of the tree of life$ and$ on
the other hand$ the fearful denun&iation of death the moment he
should taste of the tree of the kno'ledge of good and e!il$ 'ere
meant to pro!e and e%er&ise his faith( >en&e it is not diffi&ult to
infer in 'hat 'ay Adam pro!oked the 'rath of -od( Augustine$
indeed$ is not far from the mark$ 'hen he says that pride 'as the
beginning of all e!il$ be&ause$ had not man0s ambition &arried him
higher than he 'as permitted$ he might ha!e &ontinued in his first
estate( A further definition$ ho'e!er$ must be deri!ed from the
kind of temptation 'hi&h :oses des&ribes( Chen$ by the subtlety
of the de!il$ the 'oman faithlessly abandoned the &ommand of
-od$ her fall ob!iously had its origin in disobedien&e( This ?aul
&onfirms$ 'hen he says$ that$ by the disobedien&e of one man$ all
'ere destroyed Jomans 4119)18K( At the same time$ it is to be
obser!ed$ that the first man re!olted against the authority of -od$
not only in allo'ing himself to be ensnared by the 'iles of the
de!il$ but also by despising the truth$ and turning aside to lies (((
>en&e infidelity 'as at the root of the re!olt( Grom infidelity$
again$ sprang ambition and pride$ together 'ith ingratitudeB
be&ause Adam$ by longing for more than 'as allotted him$
manifested &ontempt for the great liberality 'ith 'hi&h -od had
enri&hed him( +t 'as surely monstrous impiety that a son of earth
should deem it little to be made in the likeness$ unless he 'ere also
made the equal of -od ((( 2or 'as it simple aposta&y( +t 'as
a&&ompanied 'ith a foul insult to -od$ the guilty pair assenting to
"atan0s &alumnies 'hen he &harged -od 'ith mali&e$ en!y and
falsehood( +n fine$ infidelity opened the door to ambition$ and
ambition 'as the parent of rebellion$ man &asting off the fear of
-od$ and gi!ing free rein to his lust(
J+nstitutes of the Christian eligion$ Book "e&ond$ Chapter +$ p( 103K
The referen&e to :oses refle&ts the supposition prior to the 13th &entury that he
'as the author of -enesis( There are t'o important things to note from the abo!e
passage( Girst$ that Cal!in &learly sa' the 'hole of -enesis 2)3 as literally true(
And se&ond that$ in Cal!in0s !ie'$ 6The prohibition to tou&h the tree of the
kno'ledge of good and e!il 'as a trial of obedien&e ((( meant to pro!e and e%er&ise
JAdam0sK faith6(
0riginal sin
As Adam0s spiritual life 'ould ha!e &onsisted in remaining united
and bound to his :aker$ so estrangement from him 'as the death
of his soul( 2or is it strange that he 'ho per!erted the 'hole order
of nature in hea!en and earth deteriorated his ra&e by his re!olt (((
This is the hereditary &orruption to 'hi&h early Christian 'riters
ga!e the name of Eriginal "in$ meaning by the term the
depra!ation of a nature formerly good and pure( The subFe&t ga!e
rise to mu&h dis&ussion$ there being nothing more remote from
&ommon apprehension$ than that the fault of one should render all
guilty$ and so be&ome a &ommon sin( This seems to be the reason
'hy the oldest do&tors of the &hur&h only glan&e obs&urely at the
point$ or$ at least$ do not e%plain it so &learly as it required( This
timidity$ ho'e!er$ &ould not pre!ent the rise of a ?elagius 'ith his
profane fi&tion ) that Adam sinned only to his o'n hurt$ but did no
hurt to his posterity ((( Chen it 'as &learly pro!ed from "&ripture
that the sin of the first man passed to all his posterity$ re&ourse 'as
had to the &a!il$ that it passed by imitation and not by propagation(
The orthodo%$ therefore$ and more espe&ially Augustine$ laboured
to sho'$ that 'e are not &orrupted by a&quired 'i&kedness$ but
bring an innate &orruption from the !ery 'omb ((( "urely there is
no ambiguity in Da!id0s &onfession$ 6+ 'as shapen in iniquityB and
in sin did my mother &on&ei!e me6 J?salm 4114K (((
Cal!in 'rites as follo's in "e&tion ; of Chapter +1
Ce must therefore hold it for &ertain that$ in regard to human
nature$ Adam 'as not merely a progenitor$ but$ as it 'ere$ a root$
and that a&&ordingly$ by his &orruption$ the 'hole human ra&e 'as
deser!edly !itiated( This is plain from the &ontrast 'hi&h the
Apostle J?aulK dra's bet'een Adam and Christ$ 6Cherefore$ as by
one man sin entered into the 'orld$ and death by sinB and so death
passed upon all men$ for that all ha!e sinnedB e!en so might gra&e
reign through righteousness unto eternal life by 5esus Christ our
<ord6 Jomans 4113)21K( To 'hat quibble 'ill the ?elagians here
re&urI That the sin of Adam 'as propagated by imitationI +s the
righteousness of Christ then a!ailable to us only in so far as it is an
e%ample held forth for our imitationI Can any man tolerate su&h
blasphemyI But if$ out of all &ontro!ersy$ the righteousness of
Christ$ and thereby life$ is ours by &ommuni&ation$ it follo's that
both of these 'ere lost in Adam that they might be re&o!ered in
Christ$ 'hereas sin and death 'ere brought in by Adam$ that they
might be abolished in Christ( There is no obs&urity in the 'ords$
6As by one man0s disobedien&e many 'ere made sinners$ so by the
obedien&e of one shall many be made righteous6 Jomans 4119K (((
As Adam$ by his ruin$ in!ol!ed and ruined us$ so Christ$ by his
gra&e$ restored us to sal!ation ((( Thus$ too$ in the Girst ,pistle to
the Corinthians$ 'hen ?aul 'ould &onfirm belie!ers in the
&onfident hope of the resurre&tion$ he sho's that the life is
re&o!ered in Christ 'hi&h 'as lost in Adam J1 Corinthians 14122K(
((( Therefore the only e%planation 'hi&h &an be gi!en of J?aul0sK
e%pression$ 6in Adam all died6$ is$ that he by sinning not only
brought disaster and ruin upon himself$ but also plunged our
nature into like destru&tionB and that not only in one fault$ in a
matter not pertaining to us$ but by the &orruption into 'hi&h he
himself fell$ he infe&ted his 'hole seed( ?aul ne!er &ould ha!e said
that all are 6by nature the &hildren of 'rath6 J,phesians 213K$ if
they had not been &ursed from the 'omb(
J+nstitutes of the Christian eligion$ Book "e&ond$ Chapter +$ pp( 107)104K
+t should be enough for us to kno' that Adam 'as made the
depository of the endo'ments 'hi&h -od 'as pleased to besto'
on human nature$ and that$ therefore$ 'hen he lost 'hat he had
re&ei!ed$ he lost not only for himself but for us all ((( Corruption
&ommen&ing in Adam$ is$ by perpetual des&ent$ &on!eyed from
those pre&eding to those &oming after them ((( The ?elagian &a!il$
as to the improbability of &hildren deri!ing &orruption from pious
parents$ 'hereas$ they ought rather to be san&tified by their purity$
is easily refuted( Children &ome not by spiritual regeneration but
by &arnal des&ent( A&&ordingly$ as Augustine says$ 6Both the
&ondemned unbelie!er and the a&quitted belie!er beget offspring
not a&quitted but &ondemned$ be&ause the nature 'hi&h begets is
&orrupt(6 :oreo!er$ though godly parents do in some measure
&ontribute to the holiness of their offspring$ this is by the blessing
of -odB a blessing$ ho'e!er$ 'hi&h does not pre!ent the primary
and uni!ersal &urse of the 'hole ra&e from pre!iously taking
effe&t( -uilt is from nature$ 'hereas san&tifi&ation is from
supernatural gra&e(
Ginally$ Cal!in 'rites as follo's in "e&tion 8 of Chapter +1
Eriginal sin$ then$ may be defined as a hereditary &orruption and
depra!ity of our nature$ e%tending to all parts of the soul$ 'hi&h
first makes us obno%ious to the 'rath of -od$ and then produ&es in
us 'orks 'hi&h in "&ripture are termed 'orks of the flesh( This
&orruption is repeatedly designated by ?aul by the 'ord sin
J-alatians 4113K ((( Ce are$ merely on a&&ount of su&h &orruption$
deser!edly &ondemned by -od$ to 'hom nothing is a&&eptable but
righteousness$ inno&en&e$ and purity( This is not liability for
another0s fault( Gor 'hen it is said$ that the sin of Adam has made
us obno%ious to the Fusti&e of -od$ the meaning is not$ that 'e$
'ho are in oursel!es inno&ent and blameless$ are bearing his guilt$
but that sin&e by his transgression 'e are all pla&ed under the
&urse$ he is said to ha!e brought us under obligation( Through him$
ho'e!er$ not only has punishment been deri!ed$ but pollution
instilled$ for 'hi&h punishment is Fustly due( >en&e Augustine$
though he often terms it another0s sin .that he may more &learly
sho' ho' it &omes to us by des&ent/$ at the same time asserts that
it is ea&h indi!idual0s o'n sin( And the Apostle J?aulK most
distin&tly testifies$ that 6death passed upon all men$ for that all
ha!e sinned6 Jomans 4112KB that is$ are in!ol!ed in original sin$
and polluted by its stain( >en&e$ e!en infants bringing their
&ondemnation 'ith them from their mother0s 'omb$ suffer not for
another0s$ but for their o'n defe&t( Gor although they ha!e not yet
produ&ed the fruits of their o'n unrighteousness$ they ha!e the
seed implanted in them( 2ay$ their 'hole nature is$ as it 'ere$ a
seed)bed of sin$ and therefore &annot but be odious and
abominable to -od(
J+nstitutes of the Christian eligion$ Book "e&ond$ Chapter +$ p( 10;K
That last remark is &learly poles apart from 5esus0 statement in :ark 10117$ 6<et
the &hildren &ome to me$ do not hinder themB for to su&h belongs the kingdom of
-od6( 5ust as Cal!in0s idea that -od 'as setting Adam and ,!e a test &ontradi&ts
5esus0 pi&ture of a lo!ing Gather -od(
PART III NE- LI5+T S+ED ON T+E
STOR* IN T+E
16T+ AND !7T+ CENTURIES
Chapter 6 Bi)1e Scho1ar"hip
+ mentioned in Chapter 7 that modern Bible s&holars ha!e assembled a 'ealth of
e!iden&e for their !ie' that the first fi!e books of the Bible as 'e ha!e them today
'ere all &ompiled in the 4th &entury B(C( from four earlier and no')lost
do&uments 'hi&h they label 6J6$ 6E6$ 6D6 and 6P6(
+n this present &hapter + shall begin by quoting a number of e%tra&ts from The
E%ford Bible Commentary0s +ntrodu&tion to the ?entateu&h .-enesis$ ,%odus$
<e!iti&us$ 2umbers and Deuteronomy/ 'hi&h summariAe ho' s&holars &ame to
this !ie'( And + shall then e%plain 'hy + see their 'ork as shedding important ne'
light on the Adam and ,!e story(
The logic of source/criticism
:y first e%tra&t from the E%ford Bible Commentary sets out three stages in the
argument 'hi&h led to the formulation of 5ulius Cellhausen0s a&&ount of the
origins of the ?entateu&h$ published in 1898 .there is also a fourth stage$ to 'hi&h +
shall &ome later/1
The first step 'as the a&&eptan&e that an enquiry into the sour&es
of the ?entateu&h 'as permissible at all i(e( that it 'as not ruled
out by the tradition 'hi&h regarded :oses as the author of the
'hole ?entateu&h( This tradition goes ba&k to the 2e' Testament
and &ontemporary 'ritings$ though it is probably not implied by
anything in the Eld Testament te%t itself( The reasons for
questioning the tradition of :osai& authorship of the ?entateu&h
are broadly of t'o kinds1
.1/ the relati!ely late date of the first appearan&e of this
tradition .not at any rate before the Babylonian e%ile/B
.2/ !arious data in the ?entateu&h itself 'hi&h seem to be
in&onsistent 'ith it1 an ob!ious one is the a&&ount of
:oses0 death .Deuteronomy 37/(
The se&ond step 'as the analysis of the te%t$ the demonstration of
its la&k of unity in detail( +n the eighteenth &entury$ 'ell before the
formulation of the Cellhausen theory$ theories had been
de!eloped to a&&ount for 'hat seemed to be signs of &omposite
authorship$ or the use of sour&es( "ome passages$ su&h as the
Glood story$ appeared to arise from the &ombination of t'o
originally separate a&&ounts of the same e!ent( +n other &ases it
seemed unlikely or e!en impossible that t'o separate passages
&ould ha!e belonged to the same &ontinuous a&&ount$ the t'o
&reation stories for e%ample( "o on 'hat basis is it argued that the
?entateu&h is of &omposite originI Gour main kinds of &riteria
ha!e &ommonly been used1
.1/ repeated a&&ounts of the same a&tion or storyB
.2/ the o&&urren&e of statements .or &ommands/ that are
in&ompatible or in&onsistent 'ith ea&h otherB
.3/ !o&abulary and style ) the use of different 'ords for
the same thing$ in&luding e(g( different names for
-od J*>C>$ 'lhmKB and !ariations of styleB
.7/ the appearan&e of different !ie'points on matters of
religion in parti&ular$ but also on other matters(
The third step is the de!elopment of hypotheses about the major
constituent parts of the ?entateu&h and their inter)relation( #arious
models are possible1
.1/ that a number of independent sour&e)do&uments ha!e
been &ombined$ the &lassi&al Do&umentary
>ypothesis of -raf$ @uenen and CellhausenB
.2/ that the ?entateu&h is simply a &onglomeration of small
units put together by an editor .the Gragmentary
>ypothesis/B or
.3/ that an original &ore 'as amplified by the addition of
fresh material$ either material that had pre!iously
e%isted independently as small units or ne' material
that 'as &omposed for the first time for the purpose of
modifying the e%isting &ore .a "upplementary
>ypothesis su&h as that 'hi&h 'as dominant in the
middle of the 13th &entury/(
JE%ford Bible Commentary$ pp( 14)1;K
Scholars' views of the Pentateuch !rior to 1123
En the "upplementary >ypothesis$ the E%ford Bible Commentary 'rites1
"in&e about 1800 strenuous efforts had been made to dis&o!er the
pro&ess by 'hi&h the ?entateu&h had rea&hed its present form (((
At the beginning of the 18;0s the leading s&holars held to the
"upplementary >ypothesis( A&&ording to this$ the original &ore of
the ?entateu&h 'as a do&ument kno'n as the Book of Erigins put
together by a priest or <e!ite in about the time of @ing "olomon
J10th &entury B(C(K ((( This &ore$ it 'as held$ 'as e%panded Jin the
8th &entury B(C(K by the addition of stories and other matter (((
<ater still$ Jin the 9th &entury B(C(K$ the 'ork 'as further
supplemented by the addition of the maFor part of Deuteronomy (((
An important &hallenge to this theory had already been made by
the publi&ation in 1843 of a book by >ermann >upfeld( +ts main
theses 'ere1
.1/ that the so)&alled 0original &ore0 &ontained some passages
'hi&h 'ere of later origin that the rest and
represented a first stage of e%pansion of the &oreB and
.2/ that both these later passages and the passages 'hi&h the
"upplementary >ypothesis itself had distinguished
from the &ore 'ere not fragments pi&ked up from all
o!er the pla&e but had been parts of large pre)e%isting
narrati!e &ompositions 'hi&h the &ompilers of the
?entateu&h had dra'n on as sour&es(
>upfeld thus did t'o things( >e refined the analysis of the
?entateu&h into its &omponent parts$ 'hi&h 'ere no' seen to be
not three but four in number$ and he repla&ed the idea of an
original &ore 'ith a truly do&umentary theory of ?entateu&hal
origins ((( >is position &an be represented in terms of the modern
symbols for them as P)E)J)D( JE%ford Bible Commentary$ pp( 13)17K
The contributions made by 4arl 5einrich Graf and Abraham 4uenen
En the laying of the foundations for the 6&lassi&al Do&umentary >ypothesis6 the
E%ford Bible Commentary 'rites1
A&&ording to both the "upplementary >ypothesis and >upfeld0s
theory$ the oldest part of the ?entateu&h 'as a Book of Erigins
that began 'ith the a&&ount of &reation in -enesis 1 and in&luded
most of the priestly la's in ,%odus$ <e!iti&us and 2umbers(
Doubts about the antiquity of the these te%ts had already been
e%pressed in the 1830s$ but detailed &riti&al arguments only began
to appear in the 18;0s ((( Abraham @uenen held that the priestly
la's in JPK 'ere not in fa&t all an&ient$ but had de!eloped o!er a
long period of time$ some of them being later in date than
Deuteronomy( An e!en more radi&al &on&lusion had been rea&hed
by @arl >einri&h -raf 'ho in 18;2 'rote$ 0+ am &ompletely
&on!in&ed of the fa&t that the 'hole middle part of the ?entateu&h
Japparently ,%odus 24 to the end of 2umbersK is post)e%ili& in
origin0 Ji(e( 'ritten after the e%ile to Babylon in 489 B(C(K (((
+n 18;4 -raf published his !ie's in book form and Jfollo'ing
&orresponden&e bet'een @uenen and -rafK the order P)E)J)D of
>upfeld 'as transformed into the J)E)D)P that be&ame standard(
The contribution made by (ulius 'ellhausen
The E%ford Bible Commentary gi!es as follo's the fourth stage in the argument
'hi&h led to the formulation of Cellhausen0s a&&ount of the origins of the
?entateu&h1
The fourth step is that of arranging the sour&es .or supplements/ in
chronological order and dating them( +t is in this area that -raf$
@uenen and Cellhausen made a real inno!ation$ in ((( dating Jthe
latest of the sour&esK to the post)e%ili& period( >o' are su&h
&on&lusions rea&hed$ in general termsI Along t'o main lines1
.1/ the relative age of the sour&es &an be &onsidered in
!arious 'ays1 Does one sour&e or layer take for
granted the prior e%isten&e of another oneI +s one
sour&e ob!iously more primiti!e in its 'ay of
presenting e!ents$ or its legal requirements$ than
anotherI
.2/ the a&tual or absolute dates of the sour&es &an be fi%ed
by referen&e to dates outside the ?entateu&h( "u&h
arguments &an themsel!es be subdi!ided a&&ording to
'hether referen&e is being made to fi%ed points in the
e!ents of +srael0s politi&al and religious history .su&h
as the Babylonian e%ile/ as 'e kno' them from the
histori&al books of the Eld Testament$ or to do&trines
.su&h as the demand for the &entraliAation of 'orship
in 5erusalem/ 'hose first formulation 'e &an date by
referen&e to these same histori&al books and the
'ritings of the prophets(
JE%ford Bible Commentary$ p( 1;K
As a spe&ifi& e%ample here$ the E%ford Bible Commentary 'rites1
Cellhausen used t'o kinds of arguments to establish his !ie' that
P is the latest of the four sour&es(
Girst he noti&ed the almost unbroken silen&e of the older histori&al
books$ "amuel and @ings$ 'ith regard to the distin&ti!e
institutions of the &ult pres&ribed by P ((( +n !ie' of the fa&t that
these books ha!e plenty to say about ritual$ this must imply that
these institutions 'ere not yet kno'n in the pre)e%ili& period( +t
follo's that P &ould not yet ha!e been 'ritten( The spe&ifi&
referen&e to 0the older histori&al books0 is deliberate$ so as to
e%&lude the books of Chroni&les( The for&e of this argument &ould
only be felt 'hen a true appre&iation of the late date and largely
fi&tional &hara&ter of Chroni&les had been gained ((( Chroni&les
does relate the e%isten&e of institutions &hara&teristi& of P in the
pre)e%ili& period$ and it 'as only 'hen it had been sho'n that
these elements of the Chroni&ler0s a&&ount 'ere fi&tional that a
&lear !ie' of pre)e%ili& religion &ould be obtained$ and so the
ne&essity of a late date for P established(
The se&ond kind of argument 'as based on the relationship of the
la's and narrati!es of P to the la's in Deuteronomy and the final
&hapters of ,Aekiel( JE%ford Bible Commentary$ p( 18K
6m!lications for the Adam and Eve story
+n terms of suggesting 'hat all this means for the Adam and ,!e story$ let me
begin 'ith a further e%tra&t from the E%ford Bible Commentary1
?entateu&hal sour&e &riti&ism seems to ha!e begun 'ith the
obser!ation that -enesis opens 'ith not one but t'o different
accounts of creation1 111)213 and 217)24( The se&ond repeats a
number of e!ents already des&ribed in the first$ but not e%a&tly in
the same order$ and 'ith some notable differen&es in presentation$
Jsu&h asK the differen&e o!er the di!ine names1 the fa&t that
'hereas the first a&&ount refers to -od only by the 'ord 0-od0
.'lhm/B the se&ond used the &ompound phrase 0the <ord -od0 D
*>C> 'lhm$ &ombining 'ith the 'ord 0-od0 the proper name
by 'hi&h +srael kne' her -od$ *>C>(
A&&ording to the 'ord used to refer to -od$ the se&ond a&&ount
of &reation 'as ((( gi!en the symbol J .be&ause the abbre!iations
'ere 'orked out in -ermany and the 0y0 sound is represented by
0F0 in -erman/( The first a&&ount ((( is kno'n today as P$ be&ause of
the prominent pla&e gi!en to priesthood and ritual in Jthis sour&e0sK
later parts(
+n the last quarter of the nineteenth &entury a maFority of s&holars
gradually &ame to a&&ept the &on&lusion that the ?entateu&h had
been &omposed from four do&uments or sour&es$ 'hose dates
and pla&es of origin 'ere as follo's1
J 3th &entury$ 5udah
E 8th &entury$ northern kingdom of +srael
D 9th &entury$ 5udah
P 4th &entury$ Babylon(
Dis&ussion Jin the 20th &entury$ in relation to the date of PK has
been useful for t'o reasons1
.1/ it has emphasiAed that the P do&ument did not emerge
out of thin air$ but in some passages is a &ompilation
of older traditions$ parti&ularly la'sB
.2/ it has brought to light one or t'o reasons for preferring a
si%th)&entury date for the &omposition of P to the
fifth)&entury one ad!o&ated by earlier &riti&s(
JE%ford Bible Commentary$ pp( 1;)19$13$31K
The main &on&lusions from all of this are that the Creation a&&ount in -enesis 1
&ame from the ;th &entury B(C( do&ument P$ 'hereas the Adam and ,!e story
&ame from the 3th &entury B(C( do&ument J$ and that -enesis 'as not put into its
present form until the 4th &entury B(C(
As the E%ford Bible Commentary makes &lear$ the issue of names for -od 'as one
of the starting points of ?entateu&hal sour&e &riti&ism( The four do&uments J$ E$ D
and P mentioned abo!e apparently used almost throughout the follo'ing >ebre'
names for -od1
J *>C> D The <ED
E$ P eOloOhim D -od
D *>C> D The <ED$ and
*>C> eOloOheOka D The <ED your -od
En this basis$ s&holars di!ide up the !arious stories in -enesis 1)11 bet'een P and
J as follo's1
-enesis 111)213 .6si% days6 Creation/ P
-enesis 217)3127 .Adam and ,!e/ J
-enesis 7 .Cain and Abel/ J
-enesis ;)3 .2oah Glood/ P and J
-enesis 11 .To'er of Babel/ J
But let us no' go ba&k to the question 'hi&h + asked you at the end of Chapter 31
Did you noti&e that in -enesis 1 -od is &alled 6-od6$ that in -enesis 2)3 he is
&alled 6The <ED -od6 and that in -enesis 7 he is &alled 6The <ED6I
En the one hand this &onfirms the !ery point that the Bible s&holars are making(
But it also it raises a further question( +f the Adam and ,!e story &ame from J then
'hy does it refer to -od by the title The <ED -od .*>C> eOloOhim/ rather than
The <ED .*>C>/ as in the rest of JI
There are t'o main possibilities here( Girst$ that J itself 'as &ompiled .in the 3th
&entury B(C(/ from se!eral earlier do&uments$ most referring to -od as The <ED
but one$ at least$ referring to him as The <ED -od( And se&ond$ that the Adam
and ,!e story 'as re'ritten in the 4th &entury B(C($ 'hen it 'as being taken from
J into the ne' Book of -enesis$ 'ith -od being gi!en the ne' title of The <ED
-od(
The se&ond suggestion$ that the Adam and ,!e story 'as re'ritten by a 5e'ish
priest in the 4th &entury B(C( during the e%ile in Babylon$ 'ill be a maFor theme in
later &hapters( But let me here make t'o initial points 'hi&h argue in its fa!our(
Girst$ a&&ording to the E%ford Bible Commentary1
The garden of ,den is no'here mentioned in Eld Testament te%ts
before the time of the e%ili& +saiah .Deutero)+saiah$ +sa 4113/ and
,Aekiel .,Aek 28113B 3;134/( JE%ford Bible Commentary$ p( 72K
"e&ond$ the title The <ED -od is found in only t'o pla&es in the entire
?entateu&h1 in -enesis 2)3 and in ,%odus 3130( This suggests that the title The
<ED -od represents a fingerprint of sorts left by the 5e'ish priests 'ho put the
?entateu&h into its present form in the 4th &entury B(C( and also indi&ates that$ in
the &ourse of doing so$ they paid parti&ular attention to the Adam and ,!e story(
Chapter 17 16th Cent(r Science
The 13th &entury sa' s&ien&e shedding its first light on the Adam and ,!e story$
both through the 'ork of Charles Dar'in and by dis&o!eries made in
palaeontology(
%harles 7arwin
?rior to Dar'in most people still belie!ed that mankind had emerged
&omparati!ely re&ently$ 'ith the Chur&h insisting that -od had &reated both the
uni!erse and the human ra&e in 7007 B(C( "o Dar'in0s suggestions that the ,arth
'as at least 30; million years old$ and that all &urrent spe&ies had e!ol!ed from
earlier forms$ stirred up quite a storm(
En the age of the ,arth$ Bill Bryson 'rites as follo's in A "hort >istory of 2early
,!erything1
By the middle of the nineteenth &entury most learned people
thought the ,arth 'as at least a fe' million years old$ perhaps
e!en some tens of millions years old$ but probably not more than
that( "o it &ame as a surprise 'hen in 1843$ in n the rigin of
!pecies$ Charles Dar'in announ&ed that the geologi&al pro&esses
that &reated the Ceald$ an area of southern ,ngland stret&hing
a&ross @ent$ "urrey and "usse%$ had taken$ by his &al&ulations$
30;$;;2$700 years to &omplete J-Fertsen$ "he #lassics of !cience$
p( 334K( The assertion ((( pro!ed so &ontentious that Dar'in
'ithdre' it from the third edition of the book(
JBill Bryson$ A "hort >istory of 2early ,!erything$ pp( ;9K
Dar'in0s most important suggestion in The Erigin of "pe&ies 'as of &ourse that all
&urrent spe&ies$ in&luding mankind$ had e!ol!ed from earlier forms( But sin&e 'e
are &on&erned primarily 'ith the Adam and ,!e story$ + 'ish to &on&entrate on
Dar'in0s later and e!en more dire&tly rele!ant book The Des&ent of :an$
published in 1891(
+n Dar'in0s o'n 'ords$ quoted from the -reat Books of the Cestern Corld edition
of The Des&ent of :an1
+f the anthropomorphous apes Jthe &himpanAee$ gorilla$ orang)
utan$ and gibbonK be admitted to form a natural sub)group$ then as
man agrees 'ith them$ not only in all those &hara&ters 'hi&h he
possesses in &ommon 'ith the 'hole &atarhine group Jalso
in&luding the Eld Corld monkeysK$ but in other pe&uliar
&hara&ters$ su&h as the absen&e of a tail and other &allosities$ and
in general appearan&e$ 'e may infer that some an&ient member of
the anthropomorphous sub)group ga!e birth to man (((
2o doubt man$ in &omparison 'ith most of his allies$ has
undergone an e%traordinary amount of modifi&ation$ &hiefly in
&onsequen&e of the great de!elopment of his brain and his ere&t
positionB ne!ertheless$ 'e should bear in mind that he 6is but one
of se!eral e%&eptional forms of primates6 (((
As man from a genealogi&al point of !ie' belongs to the &atarhine
or Eld Corld sto&k$ 'e must &on&lude$ ho'e!er mu&h the
&on&lusion may re!olt our pride$ that our early progenitors 'ould
ha!e been properly thus designated( But 'e must not fall into the
error of supposing that the early progenitors of the 'hole simian
sto&k$ in&luding man$ 'ere identi&al 'ith$ or e!en &losely
resembled$ any e%isting ape or monkey(
JCharles Dar'in$ The Des&ent of :an$ pp( 334)33;K
Ce &an sum up 'hat Dar'in has said so far in &hart form1
Dar'in then &ontinues as follo's1
Ce are naturally led to enquire$ 'here 'as the birthpla&e of man at
that stage of des&ent 'hen our progenitors di!erged from the
&atarhine sto&kI The fa&t that they belonged to this sto&k she's
that they inhabited the Eld CorldB but not Australia nor any
o&eani& island$ as 'e may infer from the la's of geographi&
distribution( +n ea&h great region of the 'orld the li!ing mammals
are &losely related to the e%tin&t spe&ies of the same region( +t is
therefore probable that Afri&a 'as formerly inhabited by e%tin&t
apes &losely allied to the gorilla and &himpanAeeB and as these t'o
spe&ies are no' man0s nearest allies$ it is some'hat more probable
that our early progenitors li!ed on the Afri&an &ontinent than
else'here (((
The great break in the organi& &hain bet'een man and his nearest
allies$ 'hi&h &annot be bridged o!er by any e%tin&t or li!ing
spe&ies$ has often been ad!an&ed as a gra!e obFe&tion to the belief
that man is des&ended from some lo'er formB but this obFe&tion
'ill not appear of mu&h 'eight to those 'ho$ from general
reasons$ belie!e in the general prin&iple of e!olution( Breaks often
o&&ur in all parts of the series ((( But these breaks depend merely
on the number of related forms 'hi&h ha!e be&ome e%tin&t (((
Cith respe&t to the absen&e of fossil remains ser!ing to &onne&t
man 'ith his ape)like progenitors$ no one 'ill lay mu&h stress on
this 'ho reads "ir C( <yell0s dis&ussion$ 'here he she's that in all
the !ertebrate &lasses the dis&o!ery of fossil remains has been a
slo' and fortuitous pro&ess( 2or should it be forgotten that those
regions 'hi&h are the most likely to afford remains &onne&ting
man 'ith some e%isting ape)like &reature$ ha!e not as yet been
sear&hed by geologists(
JCharles Dar'in$ The Des&ent of :an$ pp( 33;)339K
,!erything that Dar'in says here about man0s origins 'as &onfirmed in the 20th
&entury by dis&o!eries of an&ient skeletons in Afri&a belonging to a range of earlier
Homo spe&ies and by D2A studies of modern apes and humans( + shall &o!er this
in the ne%t &hapter(
Dar'in0s ideas did not$ ho'e!er$ sit 'ell 'ith the maFority of 13th &entury
Christians( +n 18;0$ soon after the first edition of The Erigin of "pe&ies 'as
published$ there 'as a famous publi& spat bet'een the Bishop of E%ford$ "amuel
Cilberfor&e$ and naturalist Thomas >u%ley( Bill Bryson des&ribes the key
e%&hange of 'ords as follo's1
Cilberfor&e ((( turned to >u%ley 'ith a dry smile and demanded of
him 'hether he &laimed atta&hment to the apes by 'ay of his
grandmother or grandfather( The remark 'as doubtless intended as
a quip$ but it &ame a&ross as an i&y &hallenge ((( >u%ley de&lared
that he 'ould rather &laim kinship to an ape than to someone 'ho
used his eminen&e to propound uninformed t'addle(
JBill Bryson$ A "hort >istory of 2early ,!erything$ p( 373K
18th century !alaeontology
En Dar'in0s &on&lusion in The Des&ent of :an that there is indeed a kinship
bet'een humans and apes$ Bill Bryson 'rites1
The &on&lusion 'as a bold one$ sin&e nothing in the fossil re&ord
supported su&h a notion( The only kno'n early human remains of
that time 'ere the famous 2eandertal bones from -ermany and a
fe' un&ertain fragments of Fa'bones$ and many respe&ted
authorities refused to belie!e e!en in their antiquity(
JBill Bryson$ A "hort >istory of 2early ,!erything$ pp( 373)340K
Bryson is referring here to the dis&o!ery$ by 'orkmen$ of an an&ient 2eanderthal
.Homo neanderthalis/ skeleton in 184; in a &a!e in the 2eander !alley( >e
&omments on matters as follo's1
JTheK 'orkmen ((( passed Jthe bonesK to a lo&al s&hooltea&her$
kno'ing he had an interest in all things natural( To his great &redit
the tea&her$ 5ohann @arl Guhlrott sa' that he had some ne' type
of human$ though quite 'hat it 'as$ and ho' spe&ial$ 'ould be a
matter of dispute for some time(
:any people refused to a&&ept that the 2eandertal bones 'ere
an&ient at all( August :ayer$ a professor at the =ni!ersity of Bonn
and a man of influen&e$ insisted that the bones 'ere merely those
of a :ongolian Cossa&k soldier 'ho had been 'ounded 'hile
fighting in -ermany in 1817 and had &ra'led into the &a!e to die(
Another anthropologist$ puAAling o!er the 2eandertal0s hea!y
bro' ridge$ suggested that it 'as the result of long)term fro'ning
arising from a poorly healed forearm fra&ture(
The ne%t maFor step for'ard for palaeontology &ame in 1831 'hen :arie ,ugPne
Dubois dis&o!ered remains of a third and e!en earlier human spe&ies$ Homo
erectus$ in a &a!e on 5a!a island in 'hat is no' +ndonesia( The find$ a skull&ap$
produ&ed an initial rea&tion similar to that of August :ayer to the 2eanderthal
bones( Bill Bryson 'rites1
:ost s&ientists disliked both JDubois0K &on&lusions and the
arrogant manner in 'hi&h he presented them( The skull&ap$ they
said$ 'as that of an ape$ probably a gibbon$ and not of any early
human(
>oping to bolster his &ase$ in 1839 Dubois allo'ed a respe&ted
anatomist from the =ni!ersity of "trasbourg$ -usta! "&h'albe$ to
make a &ast of the skull&ap( To Dubois0 dismay$ "&h'albe
thereupon produ&ed a monograph that re&ei!ed far more
sympatheti& attention than anything Dubois had 'ritten
JBill Bryson$ A "hort >istory of 2early ,!erything$ p( 38;K
Ene 'ay or another$ then$ the s&ientifi& study of the an&estry of the human ra&e
ended the 13th &entury on a something of high note$ 'ith the follo'ing pi&ture
ha!ing emerged .using today0s terminology/1
Epinion 'as ho'e!er di!ided then$ as no' in some quarters$ bet'een mankind0s
ha!ing originated in Afri&a .as Dar'in had suggested/ or in Asia .as Dubois0
dis&o!ery of the skull&ap in 5a!a seemed to indi&ate/(
Chapter 11 !7th Cent(r Science
The 20th &entury sa' s&ien&e shedding e!en more light on the Adam and ,!e
story$ in relation to our understanding both of the origins of the uni!erse and of the
origins and history of Homo sapiens(
The origins of the universe
"tephen >a'king 'rites as follo's in his book A Brief >istory of Time1
The &on&ept of time has no meaning before the beginning of the
uni!erse( This 'as first pointed out by "t Augustine( Chen asked1
'hat did -od do before he &reated the uni!erseI Augustine didn0t
reply1 >e 'as preparing >ell for people 'ho asked su&h questions(
+nstead$ he said that time 'as a property of the uni!erse that -od
&reated$ and that time did not e%ist before the beginning of the
uni!erse(
+n 1323$ ,d'in >ubble made the landmark obser!ation that
'here!er you look$ distant gala%ies are mo!ing rapidly a'ay from
us( +n other 'ords$ the uni!erse is e%panding( This means that at
earlier times obFe&ts 'ould ha!e been &loser together( +n fa&t$ it
seemed that there 'as a time$ about ten or t'enty thousand million
years ago$ 'hen they 'ere all at e%a&tly the same pla&e and 'hen$
therefore$ the density of the uni!erse 'as infinite( This dis&o!ery
finally brought the question of the beginning of the uni!erse into
the realm of s&ien&e(
>ubble0s obser!ation suggested that there 'as a time$ &alled the
big bang$ 'hen the uni!erse 'as infinitesimally small and
infinitely dense (((
As e%perimental and theoreti&al e!iden&e mounted$ it be&ame
more and more &lear that the uni!erse must ha!e had a beginning
in time$ until in 1390 this 'as finally pro!ed by JogerK ?enrose
and myself$ on the basis of ,instein0s general theory of relati!ity(
J"tephen >a'king$ A Brief >istory of Time$ pp( 8)3$ 40K
"&ien&e0s &urrent figure of 13(9 billion years for the age of the uni!erse of &ourse in
no 'ay 6dispro!es6 the 6si% days6 Creation a&&ount in -enesis 1$ apart from
&onfirming the &ommon sense !ie' that 6day6 ob!iously ne!er meant literally 27
hours( But 'hile the 6big bang6 findings &ertainly shed ne' light on -enesis 1$
they also raise a diffi&ult question in relation to -enesis 2)3( Chy$ after &reating
the uni!erse$ did -od then 'ait 13(9 billion years before &reating Adam and ,!eI
Ce 'ill &ome ba&k to this question in Chapter 13(
23th century !alaeontology
20th &entury palaeontology has shed further light on the origins of Homo sapiens
and$ therefore$ on the -enesis 2 part of the Adam and ,!e story(

1327 sa' the first of a number of spe&ta&ular dis&o!eries of 6hominid6 remains in
Afri&a( Bill Bryson 'rites as follo's1
+n late 1327 aymond Dart$ the Australian)born head of anatomy
at the =ni!ersity of the Cit'atersrand in 5ohannesburg$ 'as sent a
small but remarkably &omplete skull of a &hild$ 'ith an inta&t fa&e$
a lo'er Fa' and 'hat is kno'n as an endo&ast ) a natural &ast of
the brain ) from a limestone quarry on the edge of the @alahari
Desert at a dusty spot &alled Taung( Dart &ould see at on&e that the
Taung skull 'as not of a Homo erectus like Dubois0 5a!a :an but
from an earlier$ more apelike &reature( >e pla&ed its age at t'o
million years and dubbed it $ustralopithecus africanus (((
The authorities 'ere e!en less fa!ourably disposed to Dart than
they had been to Dubois ((( Abo!e all$ his &on&lusions fle' in the
fa&e of a&&epted 'isdom( >umans and apes$ it 'as agreed$ had
split apart at least 14 million years ago in Asia(
JBill Bryson$ A "hort >istory of 2early ,!erything$ pp( 38;)389K
After this$ and espe&ially sin&e 1343$ &ame numerous other dis&o!eries of an&ient
hominid and human remains in ,ast Afri&a( Ene of the best kno'n finds 'as that
of 6<u&y6$ &lassified as $ustralopithecus afarensis and dated at o!er three million
years ago( Ether important finds ha!e been of fossil remains of early Homo spe&ies
in the <ake Turkana region of @enya$ most notably remains of the Homo habilis
6>andy)man6 .dated at around t'o million years ago/ and the almost &omplete
skeleton of the Homo erectus 6Turkana Boy6$ dated at around 1(4 million years
ago( :oreo!er$ an&ient skeletons of modern man$ Homo sapiens$ ha!e been found
in ,ast Afri&a dating ba&k as far as 140$000 years ago(
23th century anthro!ology
20th &entury anthropology seems to ha!e shed ne' light on the -enesis 3 part of
the Adam and ,!e story( "pe&ifi&ally$ t'o o&&asions ha!e been pinpointed 'hen
mankind &olle&ti!ely made maFor turns for the 'orse$ pro!iding support of sorts
for there ha!ing been a histori&al 6fall6(

5ohn >ay'ood$ quoting post)Corld Car ++ studies of the then fe' remaining
hunter)gatherer so&ieties$ des&ribes in The +llustrated >istory of ,arly :an 'hat
life 'ould ha!e been like in an&ient hunting bands1
The typi&al unit of so&ial organiAation among generaliAed hunter)
gatherers is the band( Bands are usually bet'een 30 and 40 strong(
A larger band than this 'ould e%haust the lo&al food sour&es so
qui&kly that it 'ould be fore!er on the mo!eB a smaller band
'ould find it hard to raise enough adult men for a su&&essful
hunting party( Ar&heologi&al sites from many parts of the 'orld
sho' that this has been the a!erage band siAe sin&e at least =pper
?aleolithi& .Eld "tone Age/ times(
Bands are al'ays egalitarian and e%hibitionist beha!iour or
attempts to &oer&e other band members against their 'ill are
al'ays suppressed ((( All food and property is shared 'ithin the
band and if anyone asks for anything$ it is al'ays 'illingly gi!en(
This is not generosity but enlightened self)interest( A hunter 'ill$
on a!erage$ make a kill only on&e e!ery 7)10 days( +f a hunter kept
the 'hole of his kill to himself$ he 'ould ha!e more than he &ould
eat some of the time and nothing at all at others( By sharing his kill
'ith others$ the hunter &an be &onfident that others 'ill do the
same 'ith him1 if he has a run of bad lu&k he kno's that he 'ill
not go hungry nor is he for&ed to &ompete for game 'ith other
band members$ so redu&ing the &han&es of o!er)hunting( "ome
people ine!itably &ontribute more food than others but anyone
'ho abuses the system and tries to li!e off the labour of others 'ill
simply be e%&luded from the band (((
Disputes 'ithin bands are usually settled by peer group pressure (((
Crime is !irtually unkno'n and there is no moti!e for theft as one
only has to ask for something for it to be gi!en and it is$ in any
&ase$ impossible to a&&umulate more than &an be &arried(
J5ohn >ay'ood$ The +llustrated >istory of ,arly :an$ pp( 89)88K
The first o&&asion 'hen mankind took 'hat pro!ed to be a maFor turn for the
'orse started some 20$000 years ago( 5ohn >ay'ood 'rites1
The :esolithi& .:iddle "tone Age/ in ,urasia ((( 'as a period of
transition bet'een the big)game hunting 'ay of life of the
?aleolithi& and the adoption of farming (((
The :esolithi& sa' the appearan&e of a 'ide range of
te&hnologi&al inno!ations designed to make intensi!e e%ploitation
of Jalternati!eK food sour&es easier ((( 2ets$ harpoons$ pronged
fishing spears$ fish traps and boats made fishing an e&onomi&al
proposition for the first time( 2ets &ould also be used for trapping
seabirds and 'aterfo'l( "pe&ially shaped tools 'ere used for
prising shellfish off ro&ks( The bo' and arro' &ame into
'idespread use$ allo'ing fast and a&&urate shooting at elusi!e
forest animals and birds$ 'hile snares and traps took most of the
hard 'ork out of &at&hing small game like rabbits (((
Chat the ne' te&hnology of the :esolithi& did 'as to allo'
people to tap into these apparently limitless supplies of food( The
human population began to rise and in &ertain fa!oured areas food
resour&es 'ere so ri&h that hunter)gatherers needed to mo!e only
on&e a season or &ould e!en be&ome &ompletely settled( En&e
hunter)gatherers settled do'n and it be&ame possible for people to
a&&umulate possessions$ it be&ame 'orth'hile to spend time and
effort building permanent d'ellingsB food 'as so abundant$
sharing 'as no longer ne&essary outside the family (((
=nder these &ir&umstan&es$ the absolutely egalitarian stru&tures of
generaliAed hunter)gatherer so&ieties broke do'n( Be&ause it 'as
no' harder to e%haust the lo&al food supplies$ people &ould li!e
together in large groups or tribes( +ndi!iduals &ould no' &ompete
'ith one another to a&quire prestige obFe&ts and to a&&umulate
stores of surplus food ((( +n this 'ay$ a rudimentary &lass stru&ture
emerged in these sedentary &ommunities ((( Another &onsequen&e
of sedentism 'as in&reased territoriality and it is from the
:esolithi& that the first e!iden&e of large s&ale !iolen&e appears(
J5ohn >ay'ood$ The +llustrated >istory of ,arly :an$ pp( 32)3;K
The se&ond turn for the 'orse started some 10$000 years ago 'hen &rop farming
began( :i&hael oaf e%plains matters as follo's in his book Cultural Atlas of
:esopotamia and the An&ient 2ear ,ast1
Cereals differ from mu&h other plant food in that they &an be
stored for long periods$ pro!ided they are kept dry and free from
inse&ts or rodents( -rain &an also be heated or par&hed to pre!ent
germination( These properties of &ereals allo' a delayed return on
the energy in!ested in their &olle&tion$ so that grain &an a&t like
money$ ha!ing an a&&epted standard of !alue and a medium of
e%&hange( The storage and$ later$ &ulti!ation of grain thus allo'ed
the possibility of 'ealth a&&umulation$ promoting the de!elopment
of a so&iety in 'hi&h status 'as based on 'ealth(
J:i&hael oaf$ Cultural Atlas of :esopotamia and the An&ient 2ear ,ast$ p( 29K
And Cill Durant pro!ides the follo'ing further e%planation in his book The "tory
of Ci!iliAation1
>unters and herders had no need of pri!ate property in landB but
'hen agri&ulture be&ame the settled life of men it soon appeared
that the land 'as most fruitfully tilled 'hen the re'ards of &areful
husbandry a&&rued to the family that had pro!ided it(
Consequently ((( the passage from hunting to agri&ulture brought a
&hange from tribal property to family property (((
Agri&ulture$ 'hile generating &i!iliAation$ led not only to pri!ate
property but to sla!ery( +n purely hunting &ommunities sla!ery had
been unkno'n1 the hunter0s 'i!es and &hildren suffi&ed to do the
menial 'ork( The men alternated bet'een the e%&ited a&ti!ity of
hunting or 'ar$ and the e%hausted lassitude of satiety or pea&e (((
To transform this spasmodi& a&ti!ity into regular 'ork t'o things
'ere needed1 the routine of tillage and the organiAation of labour
J'hi&hK depends in the last analysis upon for&e(
JCill Durant$ The "tory of Ci!iliAation$ #olume +$ pp( 18)20K
79A research
D2A resear&h$ 'hi&h has shed immense ne' light on the Adam and ,!e story$
&ould ob!iously not get under'ay until after 5ames Catson and Gran&is Cri&k had
identified the stru&ture of D2A in 1343( The nature of this stru&ture and the s&ope
'hi&h this kno'ledge pro!ided for the resear&h 'hi&h parti&ularly &on&erns us is
summed up by od Caird1
D2A is made up of strings of four bases$ represented by the letters
A$ C$ - and T ((( Gor D2A to be passed on to the ne%t generation$
it has to make &opies of itself ((( "ometimes$ ho'e!er$ the &opies
are ine%a&t$ errors are madeB an A might turn into a - or a C into a
T( This is &alled a mutation( Jod Caird$ Ape :an$ p( 112K
:olecular biology
En the first key resear&h area$ mole&ular biology$ od Caird 'rites1
D2A and mole&ular studies sin&e the 13;0s ha!e &onfirmed that
the !isible similarities bet'een humans and &himpanAees are no
freak a&&ident( Ce and they belong to the same family tree (((
Comparing the D2A stru&ture of &himps$ humans$ gorillas and the
other apes$ J:orris -oodmanK found that there is only a 1(9
per&ent differen&e bet'een &himps and humans$ and a 1(3 per&ent
differen&e bet'een a human and a gorilla$ or bet'een a &himp and
a gorilla( The differen&e bet'een all three and an orang)utan is
about 3(9 per&ent (((
+t follo's that the split bet'een orang)utans on the one hand and
humans$ &himps and gorillas on the other must ha!e predated the
splits bet'een &himps$ humans and gorillas (((
Dates &an be atta&hed to these e!olutionary splits by 'orking on
the basis of some degree of &onsisten&y of geneti& &hange$ relating
it to the fossil re&ord ((( in 'hat is &alled Funk or non)&oding D2A
the differen&e bet'een spe&ies 'ill a&&umulate at a &onstant speed$
simply as a fun&tion of the rate of mutation( This is kno'n as the
mole&ular &lo&k( <ike any &lo&k$ it sometimes goes too fast or too
slo'$ or e!en stops( But in general it gi!es a good estimate of
'hen things ha!e happened in e!olution(
The mole&ular &lo&k &an be &alibrated from a kno'n date in the
fossil re&ord( ?alaeontologists re&kon from the re&ord no' that the
split bet'een the orang)utans and the other spe&ies o&&urred about
si%teen million years ago( +f that represents a D2A di!ergen&e of
3(9 per&ent$ it follo's that a D2A di!ergen&e of 1(3 per&ent must
ha!e o&&urred about half that length of time ago(
This is$ in !ery simple terms$ ho' -oodman arri!ed at the figure
of around eight million years ago for the split bet'een humans and
&himps as against gorillas$ and the date of around se!en million
years ago for the last &ommon an&estor of the humans and &himps(
Jod Caird$ Ape :an$ Jpp( 23$ 112$ 114)11;K
Ce &an put all this in &hart form as follo's1
:itochondrial 79A
The other key resear&h area in the 20th &entury 'as that of mito&hondrial D2A
.abbre!iated as mtD2A/( od Caird sets the s&ene here as follo's1
+nside e!ery &ell in our bodies is a nu&leus$ and the nu&leus
&ontains most of the D2A 'hi&h s&ientists normally study(
Eutside the nu&leus$ ho'e!er$ lies mito&hondrial D2A (((
:ito&hondrial D2A interests e!olutionary s&ientists be&ause it is
relati!ely small and therefore easier to study$ and it also has a !ery
high rate of e!olutionary &hange( "o in studying &losely related
organisms like humans$ the mito&hondrial D2A &an offer
information about the differen&es bet'een them(
Another interesting property of mito&hondrial D2A is that it is
passed do'n only through the female line( This gi!es a less diluted
!ie' of inherited history than nu&lear D2A$ in 'hi&h the father
and mother both &ontribute to the ne%t generation0s D2A stru&ture(
Ce kno'$ for e%ample$ that our mito&hondrial D2A must ha!e
&ome inta&t from our motherB and from her mother$ and from her
mother before that( Jod Caird$ Ape :an$ p( 128K
"tephen Eppenheimer$ 'riting in Eut of ,den$ adds1
Chen mtD2A is inherited from our mother$ o&&asionally there is a
&hange or mutation in one or more of the 0letters0 of the mtD2A
&ode ) about one mutation e!ery thousand generations( The ne'
letter$ &alled a point mutation$ 'ill then be transmitted through all
subsequent daughters( J"tephen Eppenheimer$ Eut of ,den$ p( 38K
Grom our point of !ie'$ the landmark pie&e of resear&h here 'as &arried out by a
team in California and published in 1389 in a paper in %ature entitled
6:ito&hondrial D2A and >uman ,!olution6( The team had studied the
mito&hondrial D2As of 179 'omen from a !ariety of ethni& ba&kgrounds and had
dra'n the follo'ing surprising &on&lusion1
All these mito&hondrial D2As stem from one 'oman 'ho is
postulated to ha!e li!ed about 200$000 years ago$ probably in
Afri&a( Jebe&&a <( Cann et al( %ature 3251 31)3;K
Chat the geneti& s&ientists 'ere &laiming here 'as that this one 'oman$ this
6:ito&hondrial ,!e6$ 'as the 6&ommon matrilineal an&estor6 of all modern)day
'omen1
And that &ollating the 179 'omen0s geographi&al origins 'ith differen&es
.mutations/ in their mito&hondrial D2As had re!ealed a pattern 'hi&h$ on a
standard assumption$ dated this 6,!e6 at some 200$000 years ago(
od Caird &omments as follo's1
There is a &urious resonan&e to the idea of being able to tra&e our
an&estry ba&k to a single 'oman li!ing in Afri&a 200$000 years
ago( +t is no a&&ident that she be&ame kno'n as 6mito&hondrial
,!e6 or 6Afri&an ,!e6 ((( The fundamental &on&eptual &lash
bet'een e!olution and the Bibli&al story of Creation seems to ha!e
found a sort of &ommon ground1 the emergen&e of a 'hole ne'
spe&ies from a single 'oman(
Ef &ourse in a sense any ne' spe&ies must e!entually be tra&eable
ba&k to a single indi!idual &arrying the geneti& mutation 'hi&h
thri!ed at the e%pense of pre!ious patterns( And the indi!idual 'as
not alone in any physi&al sense1 she 'as a member of a pre!ious
spe&ies as 'ell as &arrying the blueprint for a ne' one( "o she did
not &ome from no'hereB she emerged from an e%isting population
as a result of the e!olutionary pro&ess(
Jod Caird$ Ape :an$ pp( 130)133K
5ohn >ay'ood e%plains as follo's ho' the resear&hers arri!ed at the date of
200$000 years ago1
:tD2A mutates at an a!erage rate of 2)7 per&ent per million
years( By &omparing the differen&e bet'een the mtD2A of
different indi!iduals .or different spe&ies/ it is possible to &al&ulate
the length of time that has elapsed sin&e they shared a &ommon
JmatrilinealK an&estor( Gor instan&e$ if there 'as a differen&e of 0(1
per&ent bet'een the mtD2A of t'o people 'e ought to be able to
say that they shared a &ommon an&estor 24$000 ) 40$000 years ago(
J5ohn >ay'ood$ The +llustrated >istory of ,arly :an$ p( 77K
The resear&hers had found that the differen&e bet'een the mito&hondrial D2As of
the 'omen of Afri&an ba&kground .'here there 'as the greatest di!ergen&e/ 'as
around 0(49Q( This ga!e a sharply)defined date range of bet'een 170$000 and
230$000 years$ 'ith a mid)point of around 200$000 years ago(
The mito&hondrial D2A findings naturally prompted a sear&h for a &omparable
result 'ith the male line of des&ent( "tephen Eppenheimer 'rites as follo's in
respe&t of resear&h into the * &hromosome in men1
Analogous to the maternally transmitted mtD2A residing outside
our &ell nu&lei$ there is a set of genes pa&kaged 'ithin the nu&leus
that is only passed do'n through the male line( This is the *
&hromosome$ the defining &hromosome for maleness( Cith the
e%&eption of a small segment$ the * &hromosome plays no part in
the promis&uous e%&hange of D2A indulged in by other
&hromosomes( This means that$ like mtD2A$ the non)re&ombining
part of the * &hromosome remains un&orrupted 'ith ea&h
generation$ and &an be tra&ed ba&k in an unbroken line to our
original male an&estor( J"tephen Eppenheimer$ Eut of ,den$ p( 71K
And 'hen the results of this resear&h 'ere published$ this original male line
an&estor 'as of &ourse soon labelled 6Afri&an Adam6(
"tephen Eppenheimer also ga!e$ for the first time in popular literature$ a &lear
ans'er to those 'ith honest questions about e!olution theory( And he did this by
e%plaining ho' .as mentioned abo!e by od Caird/ :ito&hondrial ,!e &ould ha!e
6emerged from an e%isting population6(
+t 'ould be a mistake to think here that Christian reFe&tion of e!olution theory has
al'ays been a matter of blind faith( +n the 20th &entury e!en Christians 'ho readily
a&&epted that the uni!erse 'as at least 10 billion years old had genuine doubts
about e!olution( >o' &an ne' spe&ies evolve$ they asked$ gi!en that geneti&
abnormalities either lead to infertile offspring or are s'amped by the population as
a 'hole 'ithin a fe' generationsI "&ien&e 'as in &onfli&t 'ith both the Bible and
&ommon sense so there had to be something 'rong 'ith the s&ien&e(
After gi!ing a more pre&ise date of 130$000 years ago for :ito&hondrial ,!e$
Eppenheimer begins his ans'er in respe&t of human e!olution 'ith the follo'ing
statements1
Ene of the more surprising insights has &ome from a gro'ing
understanding of the effe&ts of repeated gla&ial &y&les during the
past 2(4 million years on human e!olution and e%pansions out of
Afri&a( Chereas se!ere &limati& &hange generally &auses
'idespread megafaunal e%tin&tions$ the appearan&e of ne' and
more su&&essful human spe&ies seems to ha!e &oin&ided 'ith
se!ere gla&iations and e%pansions of the Afri&an sa!annah (((
The grinding gla&ial &y&le ((( periodi&ally squeeAed lo&al
populations through the mangle of near)e%tin&tion to produ&e
ne'$ larger)brained humans (((
Eur o'n spe&ies$ Homo sapiens$ 'as born o!er 190$000 years
ago$ out of 'hat 'as nearly a human e%tin&tion in 'hi&h the total
population fell to an estimated 10$000 in Jthe E+" ; i&e ageK(
J"tephen Eppenheimer$ Eut of ,den$ pp( 7$ 374$ 1;K
2e%t$ and gi!en this$ "tephen Eppenheimer e%plains as follo's the pro&ess .&alled
6geneti& drift6/ 'hereby :ito&hondrial ,!e be&ame our &ommon matrilineal
an&estor and ho'$ in a parallel manner$ Afri&an Adam be&ame our 6&ommon
patrilineal an&estor61
Grom time to time$ some mothers0 lines 'ill die out be&ause they
ha!e no daughters sur!i!ing to reprodu&e ((( +n a small isolated
population$ this 'ill e!entually lea!e a single sur!i!ing JfemaleK
an&estral line( Drift has strong effe&ts in small groups(
A &ommon modern e%ample of drift$ seen through the male side$ is
that of small isolated Alpine or Celsh !illages ending up after
generations 'ith Fust one family surname ) "&hmidt or ,!ans$
perhaps ) on all the shopfronts(
J"tephen Eppenheimer$ Eut of ,den$ pp( ;7);4K
Coupling 'hat "tephen Eppenheimer says here 'ith 'hat 5ohn >ay'ood said
abo!e about an&ient hunting bands$ a &lear pi&ture no' takes shape to e%plain ho'
Homo sapiens emerged from 'ithin the presumed immediate an&estor spe&ies of
modern mankind .referred to by Eppenheimer as Homo helmei/(
Chat apparently happened is that a small hunting band of Homo helmei$ perhaps
30)40 strong$ be&ame isolated from e!eryone else for thousands of years 'hen the
E+" ; i&e age brought se!ere drought to Afri&a( :ito&hondrial ,!e and Afri&an
Adam 'ere born early on in this period$ probably &enturies apart$ ea&h of them one
of only a doAen or so adult 'omen and a doAen or so adult men in their respe&ti!e
generations( And as the other 'omen0s and men0s lines gradually died out$ be&ause
some mothers had no daughters and some fathers had no sons$ this e!entually left
theirs as the single sur!i!ing female and male an&estral lines(
Also during this period$ a number of band members 'ere born 'ith spe&ial traits(
And a pro&ess similar to the 6geneti& drift6 that made :ito&hondrial ,!e and
Afri&an Adam the &ommon matrilineal and patrilineal an&estors of e!eryone ali!e
today led to those spe&ial traits being passed do'n o!er many generations to the
entire band 'hi&h$ after the i&e age ended$ be&ame the nu&leus of the ne' spe&ies
Homo sapiens(
+n sum then$ and espe&ially in the &onte%t of the emergen&e of Homo sapiens from
'ithin earlier spe&ies in the Homo genus$ Christians ha!e nothing to fear from
e!olution theory0s &ontention that 'e and &himpanAees share a &ommon an&estor
'ho li!ed some ; million years ago( +nstead$ 'e should no' see all the D2A
findings as shedding important ne' light on the Adam and ,!e story(
"o finally$ and hopefully to make e!erything perfe&tly &lear$ let me summariAe
these findings in the follo'ing &hart .'ith >unting Band 0A0 referring to the small
hunting band 'hi&h e!entually produ&ed the nu&leus of Homo sapiens/1
PART I, EARL* !1ST CENTUR*
C+RISTIAN ,IE-S
OF T+E STOR*
Chapter 1! The Re"pon"e to the Ne$ Li3ht
Shed on the Stor
The ne' light shed on the Adam and ,!e story by Bible s&holarship and s&ien&e in
the 13th and 20th &enturies has re&ei!ed a mi%ed re&eption from Christians( Ce
shall look first at the response to the do&umentary hypothesis of -raf$ @uenen and
Cellhausen ) J$ E$ D$ P and all that ) and then turn to the response to the
6:ito&hondrial ,!e6 findings(
The %hristian res!onse to the documentary hy!othesis
:any Christians ha!e taken a negati!e stan&e to'ards the s&holars0 findings( The
<+E2 >andbook1 The >istory of Christianity 'rites1
As the nineteenth &entury 'ore on$ the Eld Testament &ame
in&reasingly under fire( The most influential &riti& of all$ 5ulius
Cellhausen .1877)1310/$ held that >ebre' religion had undergone
a de!elopment from the primiti!e stories of nomadi& times to the
elaborate$ institutionaliAed ritualism of the period of the &enturies
before the birth of 5esus( >e &laimed to find !arious sour&es
behind the Eld Testament la'$ 'hi&h he dated to different stages
of the history of +srael( "&holars of this outlook sa' the Eld
Testament as a pat&h'ork of pie&es 'hi&h o'ed their shape and
te%ture to outside influen&es(
J<+E2 >andbook1 The >istory of Christianity$ p( 477K
That last senten&e des&ribes the outlook of mu&h earlier s&holars 'ho$ embra&ing
the Gragmentary >ypothesis$ indeed sa' the ?entateu&h as a &onglomeration of
small units put together by an editor .see Chapter 3/( But Cellhausen0s argument
'as the e%a&t opposite of this$ namely that the entire ?entateu&h 'as put into its
present form by re)arranging material dra'n from Fust four pre)e%isting do&uments
J$ E$ D and P(
Cellhausen may perhaps ha!e gone too far 'hen &laiming that the entire te%t of
-enesis$ ,%odus$ <e!iti&us$ 2umbers and Deuteronomy &ame from Fust those four
do&uments( But + see as un&hallengeable the part of that &laim 'hi&h is rele!ant to
us$ namely that e!erything in -enesis 1)3 &ame from Fust P and J1
-enesis 111)213 .6si% days6 Creation/ P
-enesis 217)3127 .Adam and ,!e/ J
-enesis 7 .Cain and Abel/ J
-enesis 4 .Adam)2oah genealogy/ P
-enesis ;)3 .2oah Glood/ P and J
>o' else &an 'e e%plain the s'it&hing bet'een the titles used for -od$ the
dis&repan&y bet'een -enesis 1 and 2 o!er the order of e!ents in Creation$ and the
&ontinual repetitions and &ontradi&tions in the 2oah Glood story indi&ating that t'o
separate a&&ounts ha!e been inter'o!enI
Christians 'ho reFe&t the suggestion that -enesis 1 &ame from P and -enesis 2)3
from J presumably see it as a &hallenge both to the Bible0s status as 6the Cord of
-od6 and to the !ie' that Adam and ,!e equate to the 6man$ male and female$
&reated in -od0s image6 of -enesis 1( But this is in fa&t not the &ase at all( Chat
the suggestion &hallenges is the idea that -enesis 1 and -enesis 2)3 &onstitute a
single$ &ontinuous a&&ount di&tated 'ord)by)'ord by -od to :oses in the 13th
&entury B(C( and intended$ by -od$ to be read 'ord)for)'ord as literally true(
The %hristian res!onse to the &:itochondrial Eve& findings
The :ito&hondrial ,!e findings only &aught the attention of Christians after
%ewswee& populariAed the geneti& s&ientists0 'ork in its edition of 11 5anuary
1388( "in&e then Christian !ie'points ha!e de!eloped in three phases1 an initial
'arm re&eption of the findingsB then strongly)e%pressed doubts about the !alidity
of the s&ien&eB and no'$ in some quarters at least$ a re&ognition that the findings do
not undermine the Adam and ,!e story but rather help to shed important ne' light
on it(
Phase 1
To understand the initial 'arm re&eption in 1388 'e need to remember that$ up to
that point$ palaeontologists had been &laiming that skeletons they had found in
Afri&a and Asia pro!ed that Homo sapiens had e!ol!ed from earlier spe&ies around
a million years ago( And mole&ular biologists had been &laiming that humans and
&himpanAees shared a &ommon ape an&estor 'hi&h had li!ed some fi!e or si%
million years ago( All of this seemed &ompletely irre&on&ilable 'ith the traditional
Christian !ie' of the Adam and ,!e story$ a !ie' 'hi&h dated the &reation of both
the first apes and the first humans at 7007 B(C(
Christians 'ere therefore delighted 'ith the ne's in 1388 that s&ien&e$ it seemed$
had finally &ome round to the !ie' that there really 'as in the beginning a !ery
first man and 'oman( The Bible had been !indi&ated(
Phase 2
Christian euphoria o!er :ito&hondrial ,!e ended after t'o things be&ame more
'idely kno'n( Girst$ that the s&ientists 'ere not suggesting that she had &ome from
no'here but rather that she had been born in the normal 'ay to members of some
earlier Homo spe&ies( "e&ond$ that the date of about 200$000 years ago 'as not a
rough guess$ but 'as based on earlier studies suggesting that mito&hondrial D2A
mutates at an a!erage rate of 2)7Q per million years( The latest date of 170$000
years ago for :ito&hondrial ,!e .based on a 7Q per million years mutation rate/
still totally &ontradi&ted the Bible date of 7007 B(C( for Adam and ,!e(
"o Christians began to !oi&e doubts about the s&ien&e here and minds 'ere soon at
'ork seeking 'ays of &hallenging the resear&h proFe&t0s t'o basi& assumptions(
Girst$ that mito&hondrial D2A is passed on to the ne%t generation e%&lusi!ely by
the mother( And se&ond$ that the 2)7Q per million years mutation rate is !alid e!en
for relati!ely short time periods(
The e!entual 6&ase6 dra'n up against the t'o assumptions 'as set out in a 2003
Apologeti&s ?ress +n&( arti&le$ The Demise of :ito&hondrial ,!e$ no' found at the
'ebsite trueorigin(org(
En the question of 'hether mito&hondrial D2A is passed on e%&lusi!ely by the
mother$ the arti&le quoted medi&al resear&h reporting rare &ases 'here
mito&hondrial D2A had been passed on from fathers$ in&luding1
the &ase of a 28)year)old man 'ith mito&hondrial myopathy due to a no!el 2)
bp mtD2A deletion M Ce determined that the mtD2A harboring the mutation
'as paternal in origin and a&&ounted for 30 per&ent of the patient0s mus&le
mtD2A(
J"&h'artA and #issing$ 2e' ,ngland 5ournal of :edi&ine$ August 2002K
En the appli&ability of the 2)7Q per million years mutation rate$ the Apologeti&s
?ress arti&le in effe&t asked the !ery sensible question1 +s an a!erage mutation rate
arri!ed at by studying periods of millions of years !alid for a period possibly as
short as ;$000 yearsI The arti&le noted that1
=ntil appro%imately 1339$ 'e did not ha!e good empiri&al
measures of mutation rates in humans( >o'e!er$ that situation
greatly impro!ed 'hen geneti&ists 'ere able to analyAe D2A
from indi!iduals 'ith 'ell)established family trees going
ba&k se!eral generations( Ene study found that mutation rates
in mito&hondrial D2A 'ere eighteen times higher than pre!ious
estimates(
J?arsons$ et al($ 1339$ 2ature -eneti&s$ 1413;3K
esear&hers ha!e &al&ulated that 6mito&hondrial ,!e6 li!ed
100$000 to 200$000 years ago ((( =sing Jthat higher mutation rateK$
she 'ould be a mere ;$000 years old(
JAnn -ibbons$ 1338$ "&ien&e$ 293123K
+n fa&t both of these points are easily refuted$ the first on the basis that rare
e%&eptions !ery often pro!e a rule and the se&ond by referen&e to statisti&al theory(
But the Apologeti&s ?ress arti&le did make the fully !alid point that some people
'ere &laiming too mu&h for :ito&hondrial ,!e( A spe&ifi& e%ample + shall gi!e
here is od Caird0s des&ription of :ito&hondrial ,!e .in his other'ise admirable
book/ as1
a member of a pre!ious spe&ies as 'ell as &arrying the blueprint
for a ne' one(
Phase
The year 2003 also sa' the publi&ation of "tephen Eppenheimer0s book Eut of
,den$ for the first time in popular literature putting e!erything into its &omplete
s&ientifi& &onte%t$ as summariAed in Chapter 11(
"ome Christians are still un&on!in&ed( Gundamentalists in parti&ular see s&ien&e0s
questioning of the idea of a !ery first man and 'oman &reated in 7007 B(C( as a
dire&t &hallenge to the Bible0s status as 6the Cord of -od6 and to the do&trine of
6original sin6( Gor them$ the only 'ay to read the Adam and ,!e story$ and the
Bible as a 'hole$ is as stri&t literal truth(
But other Christians$ 'hile &ertainly insisting that the Bible remains 6the Cord of
-od6 and that 6original sin6 remains a !alid do&trine$ are more re&epti!e to
s&ien&e0s &laims( :i&hael -reen$ for e%ample$ is emphati& that he does not 6regard
all elements of "&ripture as of equal !alue or literally true6 .more on this in
Chapter 17/( And in his Apostoli& <etter of 11 E&tober 2011$ announ&ing a *ear of
Gaith$ ?ope Benedi&t N#+ 'rote1
The Chur&h has ne!er been afraid of demonstrating that there &annot
be any &onfli&t bet'een faith and genuine s&ien&e$ be&ause both$
albeit !ia different routes$ tend to'ards the truth(
"ome Christians 'ant to go further than this$ re&lassifying the Adam and ,!e story
either as a sophisti&ated myth or$ in the &ase of liberal Christians$ as a poeti&
a&&ount of the &reation and 6fall6 of mankind(
Ginally$ some Christians are prompted by the :ito&hondrial ,!e findings .as
&larified by "tephen Eppenheimer/ to go ba&k to an older !ie' 'hi&h identifies the
Adam and ,!e story as a parable and gi!es it the same status as the parables of
5esus( Combining the fresh light shone on matters by both s&ien&e and Bible
s&holarship$ they ha!e arri!ed at !ie'points 'hi&h put the Adam and ,!e story
into a ne' and mu&h more positi!e &onte%t$ 'hi&h 'e 'ill &ome to in ?AT # of
this book(
Chapter 1# The F(ndamenta1i"t Chri"tian
Approach to the Stor
Gundamentalist Christians read e!ery passage and e!ery 'ord in the Bible as literal
truth$ in&luding and espe&ially e!erything 'ritten in -enesis( But 'e need to dra'
a &areful line bet'een 6mainstream6 fundamentalism and its 6&reationist6 fringe(
%reationism
Creationists see ea&h of the si% 6days6 in -enesis 1 as periods of 27 hours and so
belie!e that -od &reated the entire uni!erse in 7007 B(C( Clearly they are 'rong
e!en on their o'n terms( -enesis 1117)13 states plainly that -od did not &reate the
sun and the moon until the fourth 6day6 so$ at the !ery least$ there is no reason to
see the first three 6days6 as ha!ing been Fust 27 hours long( And the s&ientifi&
e!iden&e for the uni!erse in fa&t being billions of years old is un&hallengeable(
&:ainstream& %hristian fundamentalism
Ce sa' in Chapter 12$ 'hen dealing 'ith the Apologeti&s ?ress arti&le The Demise
of :ito&hondrial ,!e$ one e%ample of ho' fundamentalist Christians try to defend
their !ie' that -od &reated$ if not the uni!erse$ then at least the !ery first man and
'oman Adam and ,!e in 7007 B(C(
Another e%ample relates to the question of 6Cain0s 'ife6 mentioned in Chapter 7(
:ost Christians today 'ill say simply that$ in&est or not$ 'e are all here today$ so
Adam and ,!e0s sons must &learly ha!e married their o'n sisters( But the
fundamentalist 'ebsite &hristianans'ers(net tries to bolster this argument 'ith t'o
suggestions( Girst$ that in&est did not be&ome a sin until -od prohibited it at the
time of :oses( And se&ond$ that in&est did not be&ome a biologi&al problem until
gene defe&ts started to appear after the 6fall6 ) Adam0s sin ) some ;$000 years ago(
2eedless to say$ s&ien&e gi!es that last idea short shrift$ pointing out that our gene
defe&ts ha!e de!eloped o!er millions of years$ su&h that in&est 'ould ha!e been
Fust as likely to result in deformed offspring in Cain0s time as it 'ould be today(
There are$ ho'e!er$ of &ourse many fundamentalists 'ho take a rather more
&areful approa&h to the Adam and ,!e story( And here + need to mention the real
reason 'hy$ prior to Dar'in$ fe' questioned the date of 7007 B(C( for the &reation
of the uni!erseB and 'hy$ today$ e!en mainstream fundamentalists are relu&tant to
reFe&t this date in publi&( The fa&t is that the follo'ing timetable of history is
beautifully neat1
7007 B(C( -od0s &reation of the uni!erse and of mankind
133; B(C( The birth of Abraham
7 B(C( The birth of 5esus
2000R A(D( The end of the 'orld
All of -od0s roles fit snugly into this timetable and the only question 'hi&h arises
relates to the fa&t unkno'n to our an&estors that the uni!erse is 13(9 billion years
old( And$ as + mentioned in Chapter 11$ it is this mu&h older date 'hi&h raises the
really a'k'ard questions$ namely1 Chat 'as -od doing during the enormous time
gap bet'een &reating the uni!erse 13(9 billion years ago and &reating Homo
sapiens a mere 190$000 years agoI And 'hat 'as -od doing during the long time
gap bet'een then and the birth of Abraham in 133; B(C(I
A se&ond point to make here relates to the date of 190$000 years ago for the
appearan&e of Homo sapiens( This date &omes from the geneti& s&ientists0 studies
of mito&hondrial D2A but some palaeontologists argue for a mu&h earlier date$
say$ around 800$000 years ago( "o although no reputable s&ientists argue for the
date 7007 B(C($ it is true that the Fury is not yet in on the e%a&t timing of the 6first
humans6(
But the fa&t remains that all fundamentalists$ by definition$ regard e!ery 'ord in
the Bible as literally true( "o they dra' no line bet'een -enesis 1 and -enesis 2
and$ ine!itably$ equate the 6man$ male and female6 of -enesis 1 'ith Adam and
,!e( And they hold uns'er!ingly to the !ie' that Adam and ,!e 'ere the !ery
first man and 'oman$ 'ith Adam made from the dust of the ground and ,!e from
one of Adam0s ribs(
;ick 'arren's book The Pur!ose/7riven <ife
i&k Carren0s best)selling book The ?urpose)Dri!en <ife 'as published in 2002
and gi!es a !ery good !ie' of the fundamentalist Christian approa&h to the &entral
theme of the Adam and ,!e story( Before + get into detail on -enesis 2)3$ ho'e!er$
let me first quote t'o passages from Carren0s book to e%plain 'hy + see him as a
fundamentalist(
Girst$ on the &reation of the 'orld$ Carren 'rites1
-od 'as thinking of you e!en before he made the 'orld( +n fa&t$
that0s 'hy he &reated itH -od designed this planet0s en!ironment
Fust so 'e &ould li!e in it ((( The uni!erse ((( is uniquely suited for
our e%isten&e$ &ustom)made 'ith the e'act spe&ifi&ations that
make human life possible(
Ji&k Carren$ The ?urpose)Dri!en <ife$ p( 27K
"e&ond$ on the 2oah Glood story$ Carren 'rites1
Ene day -od &omes to 2oah and says$ 6+0m disappointed in human
beings ((( so +0m going to flood the 'orld and start o!er 'ith your
family( + 'ant you to build a giant ship that 'ill sa!e you and the
animals(6
There 'ere three problems that &ould ha!e &aused 2oah to doubt(
Girst$ 2oah had ne!er seen rain$ be&ause prior to the Glood$ -od
irrigated the earth from the ground up J-enesis 214);K( "e&ond$
2oah li!ed hundreds of miles from the nearest o&ean( ,!en if he
&ould learn to build a ship$ ho' 'ould he get it to 'aterI Third$
there 'as the problem of rounding up all the animals and then
&aring for them( But 2oah didn0t &omplain or make e%&uses( >e
trusted -od &ompletely$ and that made -od smile(
Ji&k Carren$ The ?urpose)Dri!en <ife$ pp( 90)91K
+n the first passage Carren ignores e!erything that s&ien&e has taught us about ho'
en!ironmental &hanges led to the emergen&e of Homo sapiens( And in the se&ond
passage$ 2oah had ne!er seen rainI
;ick 'arren's views on the Adam and Eve story
Carren0s treatment of the Adam and ,!e story begins 'ith the follo'ing statement
about 6life metaphors61
Chat is your !ie' of lifeI *ou may be basing your life on a faulty
life metaphor( To fulfill the purposes -od made you for$ you 'ill
ha!e to &hallenge &on!entional 'isdom and repla&e it 'ith the
biblical metaphors(
The Bible offers three metaphors that tea&h us -od0s !ie' of life(
<ife is a test$ life is a trust$ and life is a temporary assignment(
<ife is a test
Carren 'rites as follo's about life being a test1
This life metaphor is seen in stories throughout the Bible( -od
&ontinually tests people0s &hara&ter$ faith$ obedien&e$ lo!e$
integrity$ and loyalty( -od tested Abraham by asking him to offer
his son +saa&( -od tested 5a&ob 'hen he had to 'ork e%tra years
to earn a&hel as his 'ife(
Adam and ,!e failed their test in the -arden of ,den$ and Da!id
failed his tests from -od on se!eral o&&asions( But the Bible also
gi!es us many e%amples of people 'ho passed a great test$ su&h as
5oseph$ uth$ ,sther$ and Daniel(
Chara&ter is both de!eloped and re!ealed by tests$ and all of life is
a test( *ou are always being tested( -od &onstantly 'at&hes your
response to people$ su&&ess$ &onfli&t$ illness$ disappointment (((
The key point for present purposes is the statement that 6Adam and ,!e failed their
test in the -arden of ,den6( And 'hat Carren is suggesting is that$ in putting
Adam and ,!e in &lose pro%imity to the tree of the kno'ledge of good and e!il and
in 'arning them not to eat its fruit$ -od 'as setting them a test 'hi&h they failed
&ompletely( Carren0s idea here is$ of &ourse$ identi&al to a point made by Cal!in in
Chapter 8$ namely that 6The prohibition to tou&h the tree of the kno'ledge of good
and e!il 'as a trial of obedien&e ((( meant to pro!e and e%er&ise JAdam0sK faith6(
2o' if ,!e had eaten the fruit 'ithin a day or so of her being brought to Adam in
the -arden of ,den$ then Cal!in &ould Fust possibly be right that the fruit 'as
intended as a test of Adam0s faith( And$ under these &ir&umstan&es$ Augustine &ould
also Fust possibly be right that Adam 'as not de&ei!ed by the snake0s 'ords but
sinned by listening to ,!e$ 'ith 'hom he had fallen in lo!e$ rather than to -od(
But Carren denies that ,!e ate the fruit soon after she 'as brought to Adam( En
the &ontrary$ he 'rites that$ prior to the 6fall61
Adam and ,!e enFoyed an intimate friendship 'ith -od( There
'ere no rituals$ &eremonies or religion ) Fust a simple lo!ing
relationship bet'een -od and the people he &reated( =nhindered
by guilt or fear$ Adam and ,!e delighted in -od$ and he delighted
in them( Ji&k Carren$ The ?urpose)Dri!en <ife$ p( 84K
?resumably$ then$ Adam and ,!e spent a &onsiderable time faithfully obeying
-od0s &ommand not to eat the tempting 6forbidden fruit6( "o 'hy did -od not say$
after a fair period had elapsed$ 6Cell done$ you ha!e passed the test6$ and then
demolish the treeI -od0s for&ing Adam and ,!e to &onfront that potent sour&e of
temptation indefinitely 'as &ertainly in &onfli&t 'ith ?aul0s 'ords in 1 Corinthians
101131
-od is faithful$ and he 'ill not let you be tempted beyond your
strength$ but 'ith the temptation 'ill also pro!ide the 'ay of
es&ape$ that you may be able to endure it(
+f Carren is right$ then -od left Adam and ,!e no 'ay of es&ape at all( And so$
unless 'e are to imagine that the snake 'as -od0s 6trump &ard6 to force Adam and
,!e to disobey$ Carren must surely be 'rong(
But Carren sti&ks doggedly to the idea that one of the key lessons from -enesis 2)
3 is that life is a &onstant test( 5ust as -od took a&tion after Adam and ,!e 6failed
their test6 so too$ Carren suggests$ -od takes a&tion after 'e fail( >e 'rites1
*ou may ha!e been passionate about -od in the past but you0!e
lost that desire( That 'as the problem of the Christians in ,phesus
) they had left their first lo!e( They did all the right things$ but out
of duty$ not lo!e( +f you0!e Fust been going through the motions
spiritually$ don0t be surprised 'hen -od allo's pain in your life (((
C("( <e'is said Jin his book The ?roblem of ?ainK$ 6?ain is -od0s
megaphone(6 +t is -od0s 'ay of arousing us from spiritual lethargy(
*our problems are not punishmentB they are 'ake)up &alls from a
lo!ing -od( -od is not mad at youB he0s mad about you$ and he
'ill do 'hate!er it takes to bring you ba&k into fello'ship 'ith
him( Ji&k Carren$ The ?urpose)Dri!en <ife$ p( 38K
Ginally$ and 'hile a&kno'ledging that$ e!en for Christians$ 6there are many
unhappy endings on earth6$ Carren 'rites1
2one of your problems &ould happen 'ithout -od0s permission(
,!erything that happens to a &hild of -od is Father(filtered$ and
he intends to use it for good e!en 'hen "atan and others mean it
for bad( Ji&k Carren$ The ?urpose)Dri!en <ife$ p( 137K
Clearly Carren is 'rong in all of this( 2o lo!ing Gather -od 'ould e!er 6allo'6 or
6filter6 pain$ either to 6test6 us or as a 6'ake)up &all6( Ce are all going to suffer
pain at some point in our li!es ) it is one of the haAards of life ) and 'hat 'e
should do at that time is to pray to -od to take the pain a'ay or$ failing 'hi&h$ to
&omfort us and gi!e us a ne' 'ay of looking at matters(
<ife is a trust
Carren 'rites as follo's about life being a trust1
Eur time on earth and our intelligen&e$ opportunities$
relationships$ and resour&es are all gifts from -od that he has
entrusted to our &are and management( Ce are ste'ards of
'hate!er -od gi!es us (((
Chen -od &reated Adam and ,!e$ he entrusted the &are of his
&reation to them and appointed them trustees of his property(
2o Christian is going to disagree 'ith Carren0s statement that life is a trust( Er
'ith the idea that 'e 6o'e it to -od6 to use e!erything 'e ha!e re&ei!ed from him
for the betterment of those around us$ instead of a&ting selfishly( But using the idea
of Adam and ,!e0s being -od0s first 6ste'ards6 of the earth to urge us to be
en!ironmentally a'are$ to realiAe that 'e o'e it to -od not to pollute the
atmosphere and the o&eans and not to destroy the rainforests$ in a sense tri!ialiAes
the issue of en!ironmental damage( The real sin in polluting the atmosphere is not
merely brea&h of trust$ but the far more serious one of stealing our des&endants0
&lean air and lea!ing them to &hoke to death(

<ife is a tem!orary assignment
Carren 'rites as follo's about life being a temporary assignment1
+n order to keep us JChristiansK from be&oming too atta&hed to
earth$ -od allo's us to feel a signifi&ant amount of dis&ontent
and dissatisfa&tion in life( Ce0re not &ompletely happy here
be&ause 'e0re not supposed to be( ,arth is not our final homeB
'e 'ere &reated for something mu&h better(
+n -od0s eyes$ the greatest heroes of faith are not those 'ho
a&hie!e prosperity$ su&&ess$ and po'er in this life$ but those 'ho
treat this life as a temporary assignment and ser!e faithfully$
e%pe&ting their promised re'ard in eternity(
<ife on earth is ob!iously temporary$ the question is 'hether or not it is an
assignment( The danger for those 'ho 6ser!e faithfully$ e%pe&ting their promised
re'ard in eternity6 is that their ser!i&e &an be&ome a &hore and they often end up
treating those &losest to them !ery badly( +ndeed the 6dis&ontent6 'hi&h Christians
sometimes feel stems from their 'rongly seeing life as an assignment instead of
seeing it as a Foyous opportunity to do all they &an to better the lot of those around
them(
Carren does not mention Adam and ,!e themsel!es here but he returns to the topi&
of 6dis&ontent6 'hen &ommenting on -enesis 112; .Then -od said$ 6<et us make
man in our image$ after our likeness6/1
-od0s ultimate goal for your life on earth is not &omfort but
&hara&ter de!elopment( >e 'ants you to gro' up spiritually and
be&ome like Christ (((
,!ery time you forget that &hara&ter is one of -od0s purposes for
your life$ you 'ill be&ome frustrated by your &ir&umstan&es( *ou0ll
'onder$ 6Chy is this happening to meI Chy am + ha!ing su&h a
diffi&ult timeI6 Ene ans'er is that life is supposed to be diffi&ultH
2eedless to say this ans'er is$ again$ a 'rong one( <ife has its haAards and is ne!er
going to be easy for anyone$ but -od has &ertainly not deliberately made it diffi&ult
for e!eryone as part of some master plan( Carren does not say 'hat the other
ans'ers are to the question of 'hy life is so diffi&ult( But &learly 'e should ne!er
see our o'n problems as the result of 6tests6 'e ha!e failed or as our o'n personal
share of the hardships 'ith 'hi&h -od supposedly punished Adam in -enesis 3(
Chapter 1& The Evan3e1ica1 Chri"tian Approach
to the Stor
T'o of the best kno'n e!angeli&al Christians are :i&hael -reen and 5ohn "tott$ so
+ shall in this &hapter start 'ith 'hat they ha!e to say(
:ichael Green
:i&hael -reen 'rites as follo's in his book Ad!enture of Gaith$ published in
20011
,!angeli&als ((( are not fundamentalists$ regarding all elements of
"&ripture as of equal !alue or literally true( There is room to differ
on the edibility of 5onah or the &arat)rating of the streets in the
hea!enly 5erusalem(
Gundamentalism tends to see e!erything in "&ripture as flat$ literal
truth( Clearly this 'ill not do( The Bible is a most &omple% book$
embra&ing a 'hole !ariety of literary modes ) history$ fable$
poetry$ letter$ gospel$ and so forth( +t is not honouring -od to
assess ea&h passage of the Bible 'ithout taking any a&&ount of the
literary mode employed ((( +t is not piety but folly to interpret
poetry as if it 'ere sober prose (((
There are$ of &ourse$ ,!angeli&als 'ho are fundamentalists$
parti&ularly in Ameri&a$ but it is no integral part of the ,!angeli&al
&reed( The !ery loose 'ay in 'hi&h 2e' Testament 'riters quote
the Eld should preser!e us from any infallibilist literalism( +ndeed$
the 'ord 0infallible0 'hi&h is used in many ,!angeli&al bases of
faith has been taken in t'o different 'ays by reputable
,!angeli&al s&holars(
A narro'er interpretation sees the 'ord as meaning that there is no
possibility of the least error in any statement of "&ripture( This
!ie' runs into enormous problems 'hen you &ompare the same
story in Chroni&les and @ings$ for e%ample$ or in the -ospel
a&&ounts( :oreo!er$ the Bible ne!er makes su&h a &laim(
The broader interpretation takes the 'ord in the sense of its <atin
root$ as meaning$ 0+f you follo' it$ it 'ill not lead you astray(0 That
is the sense in 'hi&h + regard the Bible as infallible(
J:i&hael -reen$ Ad!enture of Gaith$ pp( 234$ 273)277K
And -reen 'rites as follo's on the Adam and ,!e story1
J-enesis 1)2 sho's thatK Creation has a history$ as s&ien&e
emphasiAes$ and the human family is meant to &ulti!ate the earth
'ith mutual &onsideration and in &o)operation 'ith -od the gi!er(
JThen &omesK the terrible a&&ount of ho' 'e refuse that life of
lo!ing trust in -od$ ho' 'e insist on the rape of our en!ironment
and on our o'n determination of 'hat is right and 'rong$ 0the
kno'ledge of good and e!il0( By our de&laration of independen&e
from -od 'e ha!e set in motion a rebellion 'hi&h has &orrupted
the 'hole 'orld and the &ourse of e!ery human life( And -od
&omes to us$ as -enesis so poignantly puts it$ 'ith his &ry to
Adam$ 0Chere are youI0 +t is an agoniAed &ry$ a &ry of frustrated
lo!e( >ere is a parent 'ho so lo!es his &hild that anything 'hi&h
threatens that &hild0s 'ell)being and se&urity e!okes strong
passions of lo!e and 'rath(
J:i&hael -reen$ Ad!enture of Gaith$ pp( 1;4)1;;K
This does not mean$ ho'e!er$ that e!angeli&al Christians see the Adam and ,!e
story as a parable( En the &ontrary$ they treat -enesis 2)3 as if it gi!es a fa&tual
se&ond a&&ount of Creation and a genuine eye)'itness a&&ount of the 6fall6$
in&luding the suggestion that there 'as on&e a !ery first man and 'oman and that
-od really did punish Adam and ,!e(
(ohn Stott
To illustrate this + no' turn to 5ohn "tott$ 'ho 'rites as follo's in the ?refa&e of
his book +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ published in 200;1
"ome Christians Jthe fundamentalistsK$ an%ious abo!e all to be
faithful to the re!elation of -od 'ithout &ompromise$ ignore the
&hallenges of the modern 'orld and li!e in the past( Ethers
Jthe liberalsK$ an%ious to respond to the 'orld around them$ trim
and t'ist -od0s re!elation in their sear&h for rele!an&e( + ha!e
struggled to a!oid both traps( Gor the Christian is at liberty to
surrender neither to antiquity nor to modernity( +nstead$ + ha!e
sought 'ith integrity to submit to the re!elation of yesterday
'ithin the realities of today( +t is not easy to &ombine loyalty to the
past 'ith a sensiti!ity to the present( *et this is our Christian
&alling1 to li!e under the Cord in the 'orld(
J5ohn "tott$ +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ p( 10K
"tott deals 'ith the Adam and ,!e story at length in his &hapter entitled 6Comen$
:en and -od6$ presenting his &ase by fo&using on 6four &ru&ial 'ords1 equality$
&omplementarity$ responsibility and ministry6(
E=uality
En the question of equality$ and the statement in -enesis 1 that -od &reated man
6in his o'n image ((( male and female6$ "tott 'rites1
+t is &lear that from the first &hapter of the Bible on'ards$ the
fundamental equality of the se%es is affirmed( Chate!er is
essentially human in both male and female refle&ts the di!ine
image 'hi&h 'e equally bear( And 'e are equally &alled to rule the
earth$ to &ooperate 'ith the Creator in the de!elopment of its
resour&es for the &ommon good(
>e then goes on to say$ &ommenting on -enesis 31
This prime!al se%ual equality 'as$ ho'e!er$ distorted by the fall(
?art of -od0s Fudgement on our disobedient progenitors 'as his
'ord to the 'oman J,!eK1 6*our desire 'ill be for your husband$
and he 'ill rule o!er you(6 The domination of 'oman by man is
due to the fall$ not to the &reation(
J5ohn "tott$ +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ pp( 323)330K
"tott then turns to 5esus0 !ery positi!e attitude to'ards 'omen .su&h as the
"amaritan 'oman 'hom he met at a 'ell$ 5ohn 7$ and the prostitute 'ho 'et his
feet 'ith her tears and 'iped them 'ith her hair$ <uke 9/ and to one of ?aul0s less
negati!e &omments about 'omen1
5esus terminated the &urse of the fall$ rein!ested 'oman 'ith her
partially lost nobility and re&laimed for his ne' kingdom
&ommunity the original &reation blessing of se%ual equality(
That the apostle ?aul had grasped this is plain from his great
&harter statement of Christian freedom1 6There is neither 5e' nor
-reek$ sla!e nor free$ male nor female$ for all are one in Christ
5esus6 .-alatians 3128/(
%om!lementarity
En the question of &omplementarity$ "tott 'rites1
+t is 'ithout doubt by a deliberate pro!iden&e of -od that 'e ha!e
been gi!en t'o distin&t &reation stories$ -enesis 2 supplementing
and enri&hing -enesis 11
The <ED -od said$ 6+t is not good for the man to be alone(
+ 'ill make a helper suitable for him(6
2o' the <ED -od had formed out of the ground all the
beasts of the field and all the birds of the air( >e brought
them to the man (((
But for Adam no suitable helper 'as found( "o the <ED
-od &aused the man to fall into a deep sleep ((( he took out
one of the man0s ribs and ((( made a 'oman from the rib and
((( brought her to the man .-enesis 2118)22/(
>e &omments on this as follo's1
Chat is re!ealed in this se&ond story of &reation is that$ although
-od made male and female equal$ he also made them different( +n
-enesis 1 mas&ulinity and femininity are related to -od0s image$
'hile in -enesis 2 they are related to ea&h other$ ,!e being taken
out of Adam and brought to him( -enesis 1 de&lares the equality of
the se%esB -enesis 2 &larifies that 6equality6 means not 6identity6
but 6&omplementarity6 ((( Be&ause they ha!e been &reated
&omplementary to ea&h other$ men and 'omen must re&ogniAe
their differen&es and not try to eliminate them or usurp one
another0s distin&ti!es(
;es!onsibility
En the question of responsibility$ "tott 'rites1
All students of -enesis agree that &hapter 1 tea&hes se%ual equality
and &hapter 2 se%ual &omplementarity( To these &on&epts$
ho'e!er$ the apostle ?aul adds the idea of 6mas&uline headship6(
>e 'rites both that 6the husband is the head of the 'ife6
.,phesians 4123/ and$ more generally$ that 6the head of e!ery man
is Christ$ and the head of the 'oman is man$ and the head of Christ
is -od6 .1 Corinthians 1113/(
J5ohn "tott$ +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ p( 33;K
"tott &ontinues by des&ribing t'o attempts to 6resol!e the parado% bet'een se%ual
equality and male headship6( Girst$ the hard)line !ie' that 6headship6 equals
6lordship6( "e&ond$ the !ie' that ?aul0s tea&hing is inappli&able to the issue in
question be&ause it is either 6mistaken$ &onfusing$ &ulture)bound or purely
situational6( "tott disagrees 'ith both these approa&hes( And in reFe&ting the
suggestion that ?aul0s tea&hing is &ulture)bound$ he 'rites1
J?aulK dre' his readers0 attention to the priority of &reation .6Adam
'as formed first$ then ,!e6$ 1 Timothy 2113/$ the mode of &reation
.6man did not &ome from 'oman$ but 'oman from man6$
1 Corinthians 1118/$ and the purpose of &reation .6neither 'as man
&reated for 'oman$ but 'oman for man6$ 1 Corinthians 1113/ (((
+t is essential to note that ?aul0s three arguments are taken from
-enesis 2$ not -enesis 3( That is to say$ they are based on the
&reation$ not the fall( And$ refle&ting the fa&ts of our human
&reation$ they are not affe&ted by the fashions of a passing &ulture(
Ginally "tott gi!es 'hat he sees as the &orre&t and far better 'ay of 6resol!ing the
parado%61
+f 6the head of the 'oman is man6 as 6the head of Christ is -od6$
then man and 'oman must be equal as the Gather and the "on are
equal( En the other hand$ headship implies some degree of
leadership$ 'hi&h$ ho'e!er$ is best e%pressed in terms not of
6authority6 but of 6responsibility6(
This then leads on to 'hat "tott 'ants to say about the impli&ations of male
headship for the role of 'omen in ministry1 a topi& + shall lea!e until 'e look at
21st &entury &hallenges to the Chur&h in Chapter 2;(
The evangelical %hristian view of the Adam and Eve story as a whole
Ef &ourse "tott0s abo!e !ie's on 6'omen$ men and -od6 are only part of 'hat he
and his fello' e!angeli&als ha!e to say about the Adam and ,!e story( And let me
begin here by quoting the follo'ing &harming passage1
Commenting on the spe&ial &reation of ,!e$ :atthe' >enry 'rote
'ith great profundity more than three hundred years ago that she
'as 6not made out of his head to top him$ nor out of his feet to be
trampled upon by him$ but out of his side to be equal 'ith him$
under his arm to be prote&ted$ and near his heart to be lo!ed6(
En the Adam and ,!e story as a 'hole$ the <+E2 >andbook of Christian Belief
'rites as follo's in its &hapter about 6A fla'ed humanity61
+f -od is perfe&t and he made humanity$ 'hy are 'e sinful and &ut
off from our CreatorI This is one of the most basi& questions
Christianity has to ans'er( +n reply to it$ the Bible does not
ad!an&e a theory or a philosophy of the origin of e!il( +nstead it
tells a story1 the story of ho' Adam and ,!e fell from the perfe&t
relationship 'ith -od 'hi&h they originally had( This story$ in
-enesis 2 and 3$ points to an e!ent right at the beginning of our
e%isten&e on earth( +t goes ba&k long before re&orded history
began(
Adam and ,!e represent people as -od intended them to be( They
had no desire to sin$ no e%perien&e of disobedien&e$ and li!ed in
full and open fello'ship 'ith -od$ 'ith ea&h other$ and 'ith the
rest of &reation( -od did not &reate them to be like robots$
programmed to obey his e!ery 'ord of &ommand( >e 'anted men
and 'omen to obey him by their o'n free &hoi&e$ and so he ga!e
them responsibility for making their o'n de&isions(
>e told Adam and ,!e that they &ould eat freely from any tree in
the garden$ e%&ept from the tree of the kno'ledge of good and
e!il( +f they ate from that one$ then they 'ould die( -od ga!e to
people responsibility for obedien&e$ and he also e%plained the
&onsequen&es of disobedien&e( Clearly$ he did not intend to keep
humankind perfe&t by prote&ting us from e!ery opportunity to sin(
*et also he had &reated Adam and ,!e 'ith the ability to remain
&ompletely free from sin and thus li!e their li!es in obedien&e to
him(
+n the e!ent$ the &ouple de&ided to disobey( They listened to the
suggestion of the serpent and ate from the forbidden tree( As a
result of this 0original sin0$ they 'ere banished from -od0s
presen&e( 2othing sinful &an &o)e%ist 'ith -od0s holiness( 2o
longer 'ould they or any other human being e%perien&e the perfe&t
freedom of -od0s &reation( Apart from 5esus$ no one sin&e Adam
and ,!e has kno'n &omplete and open fello'ship 'ith -od( There
are many other &onsequen&es of this original a&t of rebellion$ but
the heart of the human problem is this separation from -od &aused
by sin(
"in&e humanity0s fall$ e!eryone inherits an in&lination to sin and a
desire to go his or her o'n 'ay rather than obey -od( >uman
beings are sinful by nature( There is no need to tea&h a &hild to do
'rongB it &omes naturally to e!eryone(
5esus talked about us being sla!es of sin J5ohn 8137K( >e meant
that 'e &annot free oursel!es from falling into sin( Ce &an try to
do better$ and 'e often su&&eed$ but 'e &annot altogether es&ape
the bias to sin 'hi&h affe&ts e!ery one of us( The apostle ?aul
e%perien&ed this inability to li!e up to the standards 'hi&h he
desired for himself Jomans 9114)24K( >e 'as &ontinually a'are
of being a more sinful person than he 'anted to be(
Theologians ha!e des&ribed our &ondition sin&e the fall as one of
0total depra!ity0( They do not mean that e!erything about us is
totally &orrupt or that 'e are as bad as 'e possibly &an be( They
mean that e!ery part of human nature is affe&ted by the pull
to'ards sin( There is no area 'ithin human life 'here people &an
al'ays think purely or a&t rightly (((
Although 'e are all born 'ith a sinful nature$ 'e ea&h remain
responsible for e!ery a&t of sin and disobedien&e 'hi&h 'e
&ommit( Ce like to think that$ if 'e had been in Adam0s pla&e$ 'e
'ould ha!e obeyed -od( But e!ery time 'e do 'rong 'e &onfirm
our solidarity 'ith the step of disobedien&e taken by Adam and
,!e( Ce sho' that 'e 'ould ha!e done the same(
+n fa&t the story of Adam and ,!e is not Fust about ho' it all
beganB it also des&ribes ho' temptation leads e!ery human being
into sin( The author of the story understood 'ell the psy&hology of
temptation( >e 'as 'riting as mu&h about himself as about Adam
and ,!e( >e des&ribes the doubt that &omes into the mind1 0+t 'on0t
matter this on&e$ it is not really so bad(0 The author kne' about
that persistent !oi&e in the mind that &on!in&es us to a&t against
our better Fudgement( En&e &on!in&ed$ 'e &on&entrate on the
attra&tions of the parti&ular temptation1 0+t 'ould be ni&e ((( Chy
notI0 Ginally$ 'ith our &ons&ien&e suitably silen&ed$ 'e go our o'n
'ay( Then$ unless 'e ha!e be&ome used to a parti&ular sin$ 'e feel
pangs of guilt and shame( The e%perien&e of Adam and ,!e is
&ommon to e!eryone (((
Chen people are a&&used of sin$ they ha!e a distin&t tenden&y to
make e%&uses for themsel!es and$ if possible$ to blame someone
else( This happened in the story of Adam and ,!e( Adam blamed
,!e and she blamed the serpentH The Bible later identifies the
serpent 'ith the de!il or "atan$ -od0s ar&h)enemy in the spiritual
realm( But it ne!er allo's us to pass all the blame for sin to him(
Ce sin be&ause of our o'n e!il desire( "atan merely 'orks on this
trait in us( J<+E2 >andbook of Christian Belief$ pp( 279)247K
Chapter 1. The Li)era1 Chri"tian Approach
to the Stor
+ mentioned in Chapter 17 that 5ohn "tott dismisses the liberal Christian approa&h
to the Bible 'ith the 'ords1
JThe liberalsK$ an%ious to respond to the 'orld around them$ trim
and t'ist -od0s re!elation in their sear&h for rele!an&e ((( JandK
surrender to modernity(
@eith Card replies to this in three passages in his book Christianity1 A "hort
+ntrodu&tion$ published in 2000( +n the first passage he 'rites1
Ene &hallenge to modern Christianity ((( is to re)orient itself to the
s&ientifi& re!olution 'hi&h has transformed the 'orld sin&e the
si%teenth &entury( <ike people in general$ Christians may take
many attitudes to modern s&ientifi& ad!an&es ) perhaps 'el&oming
the amaAing ad!an&es in medi&al &are$ 'hile fearing the equally
amaAing ad!an&es in de!eloping 'eapons of destru&tion and
te&hniques of geneti& manipulation( Changes in e&onomi&s and
te&hnology ha!e freed 'omen from e&onomi& dependen&y and an
imposed !o&ation of &hild)bearing$ so that ne' questions of
a&hie!ing true human equality$ in the light of the ob!ious male
dominan&e of past &enturies$ need to be fa&ed( "imilarly$ ne'
s&ientifi& a'areness of the fragility of our planetary e&o)system
and of the interdependen&y of all things in that system$
ne&essitates fresh ethi&al thinking on ho' to sustain the earth as a
habitation for li!ing beings(
Christianity ((( has a &ommitment to human Fusti&e$ to
re&on&iliation 'ith and &ompassion for friends and enemies alike$
and to &aring for the earth as -od0s &reation and gift to humanity(
+n this rapidly &hanging 'orld$ the &hur&hes 'ill ha!e to &hange
too$ to think out a ne' !ision of -od0s &reation in the !astly
e%panded &osmi& &onte%t of modern s&ien&e$ and in !ie' of the
quite ne' human ability to &hange the earth itself(
J@eith Card$ Christianity1 A "hort +ntrodu&tion$ p( 4K
+n the se&ond passage Card 'rites1
"ome Christians 'ould ((( say that there is no reason to e%pe&t
infallibility of the Bible$ any more than of any other religious te%t(
There may be errors of fa&t ((( and e!en failures of moral
per&eption ) as 'hen 'omen are told to be obedient to men( The
beliefs of the Bibli&al 'riters remained limited by the &ulture of
their day( J@eith Card$ Christianity1 A "hort +ntrodu&tion$ p( 110K
And in the third passage he 'rites1
:ost Christians a&&ept that &ontemporary s&ien&e gi!es an
a&&urate history of the uni!erse( The t'o -enesis stories are then
not taken literally$ but are seen as poeti& a&&ounts 'ith a spiritual
tea&hing of the dependen&e of all things on -od(
J@eith Card$ Christianity1 A "hort +ntrodu&tion$ pp( 3)10K

Card already tou&hes here on t'o issues rele!ant to -enesis 2)31 -od0s &reation
and mankind0s 6failure of moral per&eption6(
The liberal %hristian a!!roach to Genesis 1
But before e%amining 'hat liberal Christians say about -enesis 2)3$ let us first get
a fla!our of their thinking on -enesis as a 'hole by looking at 'hat they say about
-enesis 1( Card sets the s&ene as follo's1
All Christians belie!e that -od &reated the uni!erse( This is
probably the most important of all Christian beliefs$ be&ause
almost e!erything else 'ill depend on ho' people understand the
nature of -od as &reator ((( Almost all Christians belie!e that the
uni!erse is not self)e%istent$ but has been intentionally brought
into being .&reated/ by a being beyond it$ 'hi&h is self)e%istent(
:ost s&ientists today think that the uni!erse is bet'een 10 and 20
thousand million years old$ and that it has e%panded from a
prime!al dot of !irtually infinite density and mass to its present
&omple% state$ &onsisting of millions of gala%ies$ themsel!es
&ontaining millions of stars and millions of planets( En most
s&ientifi& a&&ounts$ the uni!erse 'ill go on e%panding and &ooling
at the same time$ until it runs out of heat and &omes to a froAen
stand)still( Er it may &ollapse in on itself again$ and all things 'ill
end in an ines&apable blaAe of intense &osmi& radiation(
Card then sets out t'o liberal !ie's of -enesis 1( En the first !ie'$ that of
6Timeless Creation6$ he &omments fa!ourably on Augustine0s !ie'$ quoted by
"tephen >a'king .see Chapter 11/ that 6time did not e%ist before the beginning of
the uni!erse6 and &on&ludes by saying1
The do&trine of &reation ((( reminds us that -od is infinitely far
beyond time$ e!en if he &an truly appear in time( As -od is beyond
time$ the future is as present to -od as the present or the past( Ce
e%perien&e our li!es as passing through a series of times$ one after
the other$ but to -od the 'hole of &reated being e%ists in one
timeless eternal 0no'0( -od sees 'hat is future to us as eternally
present( "o -od de&rees 'hat is to happen in the 'hole of the
uni!erse in his one eternal a&t of &reation ((( +t is as if -od &reates
the 'hole of our li!es at on&e$ and so kno's and de&rees e%a&tly
'hat is going to happen to us at e!ery moment of our li!es( The
future ne!er slips from -od0s &ontrol$ and all things are under the
hand of -od( J@eith Card$ Christianity1 A "hort +ntrodu&tion$ p( 17K
And on the se&ond !ie'$ that of 6Continuous Creation6$ Card 'rites1
"ome Christians$ a&&epting that -od is &ontinuously &reating (((
add that at ea&h moment -od is free to &reate in 'ays 'hi&h he
had not pre!iously de&ided( -od &an$ for e%ample$ &all :oses to
ser!e him$ and then 'ait to see ho' :oses 'ill respond( +n !ie'
of the nature of :oses0 response$ -od &an then shape the future in
an appropriate 'ay( Creation 'ill be a sort of &ontinuing
&on!ersation bet'een -od and &reated persons$ in 'hi&h 'hat
happens 'ill al'ays depend partly on 'hat &reatures de&ide )
though in the end$ -od remains in &ontrol(
The liberal %hristian a!!roach to the Adam and Eve story
Turning to the liberal Christian approa&h to the Adam and ,!e story$ the +llustrated
Bible Di&tionary 'rites1
Although retaining the &on&eption of man as a fallen being$
&ontemporary liberal theology denies the histori&ity of the e!ent of
the Gall( ,!ery man$ it is said$ is his o'n Adam(
@eith Card e%pands on that last remark as follo's1
Christians talk about 0original sin0$ as the state into 'hi&h 'e are
born$ 'hi&h makes sin$ and therefore spiritual death$ almost
ine!itable( Traditionally there are t'o &omponents to original sin(
There is the fa&t that 'e la&k &lear kno'ledge of the presen&e of
-od( And there is the fa&t that$ largely be&ause of that$ 'e la&k the
po'er to do 'hat is right naturally and readily (((
E!er thousands of generations$ so many human beings ha!e made
selfish &hoi&es that human so&iety has been &orrupted( Ce are all
no' born into a so&iety 'here greed and egoism is en&ouraged by
the stru&tures of so&iety$ and 'here the sense of -od has been so
repressed that it has almost been lost altogether( Ce are not born
on an equal playing)field$ 'ith an equal &han&e of &hoosing good
or bad( Ce are !irtually bound to &hoose bad$ be&ause so many
things in so&iety tea&h us to do so from the moment 'e are born$
and be&ause 'e la&k that &lose relationship to -od 'hi&h 'ould
gi!e us the strength to resist the temptation of egoism( That is the
essen&e of original sin( The human ra&e has &ut itself off$ by
millions of selfish a&tions by our an&estors$ from the po'er$
'isdom and goodness of -od (((
The do&trine of original guilt simply states the truth that all
humans are born 'ith fatally 'eakened 'ills$ 'hi&h 'ould lead
them to destru&tion if it 'ere not for the forgi!ing gra&e of -od(
Card then sets out t'o further liberal !ie's on -enesis 2)3( >e des&ribes the first
in the follo'ing terms1
A modified !ie' is that held$ for instan&e$ by the t'entieth)&entury
philosopher G(( Tennant( Consistent 'ith e!olutionary theory$ it
holds that the first humans ((( 'ere indeed inno&ent$ not yet ha!ing
made a moral &hoi&e( They 'ere$ ho'e!er$ subFe&t to hardship$
&onfli&t and death$ like other mammals( They might 'ell ha!e
been lustful and aggressi!e$ like most su&&essfully e!ol!ed
spe&ies( Chen the first moment of responsible moral &hoi&e &ame$
it 'as perhaps only a sense that one should not kill so many
enemies$ or not torture all &apti!es quite so mu&h( Chat 'as in
question 'as a slo'$ gradual moralisation of primal human
desires( The first humans &ould ha!e &onsistently &hosen 'hat they
per&ei!ed to be good$ ho'e!er morally fla'ed it may seem to us(
+f they had done so$ human history 'ould ha!e been !ery different(
?erhaps the sense of -od0s presen&e 'ould ha!e gro'n in a strong
and &ontinuous 'ay$ and -od 'ould ha!e helped them al'ays to
make good and &reati!e &hoi&es(
But in fa&t they &hose egoism( This &hoi&e spread through the
so&ieties of their des&endants$ until the 'hole human ra&e 'as
lo&ked into a &ourse of egoisti& &hoi&es( The sense of -od0s
presen&e faded ((( 0Eriginal sin0 is the state of estrangement from
-od and 'eakness of 'ill 'hi&h is &aused by the failure of early
JhumansK to gro' morally as they should ha!e done(
Card sets out the other liberal !ie' of -enesis 2)3 as follo's1
A more radi&al interpretation$ taken by theologians like ?aul
Tilli&h$ is that estrangement from -od is ne&essary to human
e%isten&e in freedom( +t might be said that humans &annot be truly
free unless they are free from an intense$ e!en o!erpo'ering$ sense
of the omnipotent -od (((
There is a ne&essary moral imperfe&tion and a la&k of -od)
&ons&iousness in human so&iety( This &ould be &alled 0original sin0(
+t is not due to something that happened in the past$ but it is the
present &ondition of being alienated from -od( +t is &ertainly a
&ondition from 'hi&h one needs to be deli!ered$ if there is to be
any possibility of a &ompassionate$ Fust and equitable so&iety(
+ disagree 'ith many aspe&ts of the liberal !ie' of -enesis 2)3$ in&luding the !ie'
of -enesis 2 as a se&ond 6poeti&6 a&&ount of &reation and of -enesis 3 as a poeti&
e%planation for mankind0s fallen nature( But 'e must gi!e &redit for one point
'hi&h the liberals make$ namely that as Card 'rites in another book$ -od$ Gaith
and The 2e' :illennium1
The theory of e!olution gi!es !aluable ne' insights into the
relation of -od to the &reated uni!erse(
J-od$ Gaith and The 2e' :illennium$ p( 122K
PART , T+E SEARC+ FOR T+E TRUE
STOR*
Chapter 10 Searchin3 for the Tr(e Adam and
Eve Stor
,%perts on &ondu&ting sear&hes$ 'hether army personnel looking for a terrorist
bomb or poli&e offi&ers looking for a dead body$ follo' t'o basi& rules( "tart the
sear&h in the pla&e.s/ 'here you are most likely to find 'hat you are looking for(
And if it be&omes ne&essary to broaden the sear&h area$ then dra' up and follo' a
'ell thought)out plan(
Any sear&h for the true Adam and ,!e story must ob!iously follo' those same
rules( But the analogy here is not so mu&h a sear&h for a dead body as a sear&h for
&lues to the murder( And$ as in any murder in!estigation$ putting the &lues together
'ill be like assembling a Figsa' puAAle 'here there is no pi&ture on the bo%$ 'here
some pie&es are missing and 'here many of the pie&es 'e ha!e do not belong to
the puAAle at all(
:urder in!estigations are of &ourse highly &omple% but almost all in!ol!e three
basi& elements1 the &rime s&ene$ members of the publi& 'ith information about
either the !i&tim or the murderer$ and e%pert 'itnesses like the pathologist 'ho
e%amines the body or the 6C"+6 staff 'ho deal 'ith things like fingerprints and
D2A or fibre tra&es(
Ene of the most important fa&tors in any murder in!estigation is the approa&h
taken by the 6lead6 dete&ti!es( They sho' sympathy to the !i&tim0s family$
gratitude to members of the publi& 'ho pro!ide information and &ourtesy to the
e%pert 'itnesses( But they keep an open mind( En the one hand$ they remember
&ases 'here the grie!ing 'ife turned out to be the murderess$ 'here the key eye)
'itness statement pro!ed to be a pa&k of lies and 'here the e%perts either made
serious mistakes or 'orked from premises 'hi&h qui&kly unra!elled during &ross)
e%amination in &ourt( And on the other hand$ they keep a &areful note of e!ery
shred of information$ 'ell a'are that a &lue 'hi&h initially seems tri!ial or
unlikely may e!entually hold the key to the entire &ase(
+ suggest therefore that$ as 'e &ondu&t our sear&h for the true Adam and ,!e story$
'e follo' the same prin&iples as dete&ti!es in!estigating a murder( Girst$ that 'e
keep an open mind( "e&ond$ that 'e start our sear&h by looking for &lues in the
most likely pla&es and by asking all the rele!ant questions( And third that$ 'hen 'e
ha!e all the immediate &lues and ans'ers 'e seem likely to get$ and if matters still
remain un&lear$ 'e start looking else'here and begin 'orking out some
hypotheses(
4ee!ing an o!en mind
+n urging that 'e keep an open mind about the Adam and ,!e story$ + am not
suggesting that 'e abandon either the !ie' that the Bible is 6the Cord of -od6 or
the do&trine of 6original sin6(

"ometimes 5esus said things 'hi&h 'ere literally true$ 'hile at other times he
spoke in parables$ but this does not mean .+ hopeH/ that 'e pay mu&h less attention
to his parables( "imilarly$ as 'e sa' in Chapter 12$ !ie'ing the Adam and ,!e
story as a parable .or as a sophisti&ated myth or as a poeti& a&&ount of ho'
mankind 6fell6/ is Fust as &onsistent 'ith the Bible0s being the Cord of -od as
!ie'ing the story as literally true(
As for the do&trine of 6original sin6$ + mentioned in Chapter 2 the !ie' of the
Catholi& Chur&h that 6-enesis 3 uses figurati!e language$ but affirms a prime!al
e!ent$ a deed that took pla&e at the beginning of the history of man(6 + noted in
Chapter 11 the !ie' of s&ien&e that there ha!e been t'o o&&asions 'hen mankind
&olle&ti!ely made maFor turns for the 'orse( And + quoted in Chapter 14 se!eral
passages from @eith Card making it &lear that e!en the most liberal of Christians
endorse 6original sin6(
Chat + mean by 6keeping an open mind6 is that 'e need to set aside all our pre)
&on&eptions about the e%a&t nature of the Adam and ,!e story( Chen dete&ti!es go
to a s&ene and find a dead body$ an empty bottle of sleeping pills$ an open bottle of
brandy and a typed sui&ide note$ they might be tempted to Fump to the &on&lusion
that it 6must6 be a sui&ide( But if they are good dete&ti!es they 'ill 'ait for the
pathologist0s report and$ until then$ handle matters as a possible &ase of murder(
Starting the search
"o let us start our sear&h for &lues about the Adam and ,!e story by approa&hing
matters like dete&ti!es 'orking on a murder &ase1
1( 6#isiting the s&ene61 &ondu&ting a forensi& sear&h of
-enesis 1)3 and$ in parti&ular$ of -enesis 2)3 itself(
2( 6+nter!ie'ing 'itnesses61 e%amining 'hat 5esus$ ?aul$
Augustine and Cal!in said about Adam and ,!e and looking
at the !ie's of 21st &entury Christian 'riters(
3( 6Consulting 0e%pert0 'itnesses61 &onsidering the !ie's of
Bible s&holars and the findings of s&ientists(
&+isiting the scene&
Dete&ti!es attending a murder s&ene are looking for ans'ers to a !ariety of
questions1 Cho is the !i&tim and 'hat is hisLher ba&kgroundI >as the &ulprit left
behind anything .property$ fingerprints$ blood et&(/ that might identify himLherI
>o' did the !i&tim dieI Chat 'as the moti!e for the killingI Chere did it take
pla&e .&ould the body ha!e been mo!ed from else'here/I Chen e%a&tly did it take
pla&eI And many other questions(
"imilarly$ 'hen 'e sear&h through the rele!ant parts of the Bible$ 'e need to ha!e
our list of questions ready1 Cho 'ere Adam and ,!eI >as the author of -enesis 2)
3 left behind any 6fingerprints6 that might help to identify himI Chat is the Adam
and ,!e story really aboutI Chy$ 'here and 'hen 'as the story 'rittenI And$
again$ many other questions(
En the basis of things tou&hed on in Chapters 1)7$ the key sour&es of possible &lues
to the ans'ers to our questions &an be listed as follo's1
a( Adam and ,!e1 the !ery first man and 'oman$ presumably
the same as the 6man$ male and female$ made in -od0s
image6 of -enesis 1
b( The title 6The <ED -od6 in -enesis 2)31 different to the
titles 6-od6 in -enesis 1 and 6The <ED6 in -enesis 7
&( The differen&e bet'een -enesis 1 and -enesis 2 o!er the
order of e!ents in Creation
d( The suggestion in -enesis 214); that$ initially$ -od irrigated
the earth from the ground up
e( Adam0s being made from the dust of the ground
f( The detail about the lo&ation of the -arden of ,den1 spe&ifi&
mention of the Tigris and ,uphrates ri!ers
g( -od0s intention that Adam is to be a &rop farmer
h( The animals$ and Adam0s reFe&tion of them as 6unfit6 helpers
i( ,!e being made from one of Adam0s ribs and then Adam0s
des&ription of her as 6flesh of my flesh6
F( The talking snake
k( The forbidden fruit1 its identity and the effe&t eating it has
on Adam and ,!e .making them a'are of their nakedness/
l( The fa&t that Adam and ,!e do not apologiAe to -od and
that -od does not in!ite them to repent and seek forgi!eness
m( The pi&ture of a harsh -od and the 'ay he punishes ,!e
.6greatly multiplying her pain in &hildbearing6/ and Adam
n( The e%pulsion from the -arden of ,den$ in order to deny the
&ouple a&&ess to the tree of life
o( The linking of the Adam and ,!e story in -enesis 2)3 'ith
the Cain and Abel story in -enesis 7
p( The mention of Cain0s 'ife
q( The genealogies in -enesis 4 and else'here gi!ing a date
for Adam and ,!e of around ;$000 years ago(
,!en before inter!ie'ing 'itnesses and &onsulting e%perts$ t'o things emerge
here( Girst$ the title 6The <ED -od6 .not used else'here in -enesis/ seems to be
a 6fingerprint6 left behind by the author of -enesis 2)3( "e&ond$ the spe&ifi&
mention of the Tigris and ,uphrates ri!ers .and of the ?ishon and -ihon$ e!en
though these names mean nothing to us/ suggests that the a&&ount &ould perhaps
ha!e been 'ritten in Babylon$ during the 5e'ish e%ile there in the ;th and 4th
&enturies B(C(
&6nterviewing witnesses&
Gurther important &lues emerge 'hen 'e look at 'hat 5esus$ ?aul$ Augustine$
Cal!in and 21st &entury Christian 'riters ha!e to say about the Adam and ,!e
story(
5esus0 relati!e silen&e on the subFe&t$ quoting only -enesis 2127$ 'arns us that
there are a fe' 6suspi&ious6 things about the story( +n addition$ 5esus makes it &lear
in his parable of the Ci&ked Tenants that -od al'ays gi!es e!eryone repeated
opportunities to repent and seek his forgi!eness( And he also emphasiAes$ in <uke
1311)4 and 5ohn 312)3$ that -od punishes no one in this life(
?aul and Augustine tell us se!eral interesting things about Adam and ,!e
themsel!es and deal at length 'ith the nature and impli&ations of the sin &ommitted
in the -arden of ,den( The do&trine of 6original sin6 emerges$ along 'ith the
possibility that 'hat Adam and ,!e did 'as so utterly 'i&ked that -od perhaps
had no &hoi&e but to punish them se!erely( But Cal!in0s unlikely idea that -od
planted the tree of the kno'ledge of good and e!il in the -arden as a test of
Adam0s faith also emerges and 'arns us that$ 'hile 6original sin6 is a fully &redible
do&trine$ 'e should be &areful not to 'ander a'ay from 5esus0 pi&ture of a lo!ing
Gather -od(
Eur 21st &entury Christian 'riters both help and hinder our in!estigation( i&k
Carren makes the strange suggestion$ on the basis of -enesis 214);$ that it did not
rain before the time of the 2oah Glood and also goes ba&k to Cal!in0s notion that
-od 'as testing Adam in the -arden of ,den( But Carren also makes some good
points as 'ell( +n parti&ular$ his pi&ture of life as a test$ a trust and a temporary
assignment en&ourages us to look for positi!e things in the Adam and ,!e story$
instead of seeing it as a grim a&&ount of ho' e!en mankind0s !ery first sin 'as
harshly punished(
The e!angeli&als :i&hael -reen and 5ohn "tott take us a'ay some'hat from the
stri&t literal truth approa&h of the fundamentalists( 5ohn "tott stresses that the
relation bet'een the se%es is a blend of equality and &omplementarity( And$ in
respe&t of -enesis 311; .*our husband shall rule o!er you/ and ?aul0s talk in
,phesians 4123 about 6male headship6$ "tott helpfully emphasiAes that this means
responsibility rather than authority( Ginally$ the <+E2 >andbook0s analysis of the
Adam and ,!e story as a 'hole makes it &lear that its author 'as a 'ell)edu&ated
person 'ith deep insights into human nature and the psy&hology of temptation(
@eith Card gi!es the liberal Christian !ie' of the Bible in general and of the Adam
and ,!e story in parti&ular1
:ost Christians a&&ept that &ontemporary s&ien&e gi!es an
a&&urate history of the uni!erse( The t'o -enesis stories are then
not taken literally$ but are seen as poeti& a&&ounts 'ith a spiritual
tea&hing of the dependen&e of all things on -od ((((
The do&trine of original guilt simply states the truth that all
humans are born 'ith fatally 'eakened 'ills$ 'hi&h 'ould lead
them to destru&tion if it 'ere not for the forgi!ing gra&e of -od(
J@eith Card$ Christianity1 A "hort +ntrodu&tion$ pp( 3)10$71K
These !ie's may or may not be &orre&t but$ again$ they en&ourage us to 6think
outside the en!elope6 'hen asking questions about -enesis 2)3(
&%onsulting 'e*!ert' witnesses&
Turning to 6e%pert6 'itness$ and before 'e &ome on to Bible s&holars and
s&ientists$ let us begin 'ith the Chur&h itself( The leader of the lo&al &hur&h may or
may not kno' a lot about a murder !i&tim$ but he or she is &ertain to be a 'ell)
edu&ated person 'ith long e%perien&e in matters of faith and doubt( And here 'e
must be prepared to be surprised( A oman Catholi& priest 'ill probably tell us to
read the rele!ant parts of the Cate&hism of the Catholi& Chur&h( But if 'e press
him to gi!e his personal !ie's$ 'e Fust possibly might find him e&hoing the
follo'ing remarks made by Cardinal ?ell during a debate 'ith atheist i&hard
Da'kins on Australian T# on 3 April 20121
JThe Adam and ,!e storyK is a beautiful$ sophisti&ated$
mythologi&al a&&ount( +t0s not s&ien&e but it0s there to tell us t'o or
three things( Girst of all that -od &reated the 'orld and the
uni!erse( "e&ondly$ that the key to the 'hole uni!erse$ the really
signifi&ant thing$ are humans and$ thirdly$ it is a !ery sophisti&ated
mythology to try to e%plain the e!il and suffering in the 'orld(
Bible s&holarship brings further surprises( As + e%plained in Chapter 3$ s&holars are
no' generally agreed that -enesis 'as put into its present form in the 4th &entury
B(C( and that -enesis 1 &ame from P 'hile the Adam and ,!e story &ame from J(
This pro!ides &orroboration for the idea that the Adam and ,!e story might ha!e
been 'ritten in Babylon during the 5e'ish e%ile$ as also does the follo'ing remark
in the E%ford Bible Commentary1
The garden of ,den is no'here mentioned in Eld Testament te%ts
before the time of the Je%ile to Babylon in 489 B(C(K(
Ce also no' ha!e an e%planation for the differen&es bet'een -enesis 1 and 2 and
&an for the first time question 'hether Adam and ,!e really equate to the 6man$
male and female6 of -enesis 1(
Ginally$ s&ien&e brings its o'n set of surprises( Chapters 10 and 11 summariAed
'hat s&ien&e has to say and made t'o points parti&ularly &lear( Girst$ that there
ne!er 'as a !ery first man and 'oman( And se&ond$ that Homo sapiens originated
.at least/ some 190$000 years ago$ far earlier than the ;$000 years ago suggested by
a literal reading of the Bible( "&ien&e also gi!es robust ans'ers to the question of
ho' Homo sapiens &ould ha!e emerged from 'ithin an earlier spe&ies .and thus
also to the question of 'here Cain0s 'ife &ame from/(
<ooking elsewhere and working out some hy!otheses
Ce no' ha!e all the immediate &lues and ans'ers 'e seem likely to get from our
in!estigations thus far( But se!eral matters remain un&lear$ abo!e all in relation to
Adam0s being made from the dust of the ground$ to the animals$ to the snake$ to the
fruit and to the punishment of ,!e(
"o 'e need to resume our sear&h and$ on the question of the snake$ Cikipedia
pro!ides the follo'ing &lue1
+n religion$ mythology$ and literature$ serpents and snakes
represent fertility ((( JCikipedia$ "erpent .symbolism/K
To pursue this point 'e turn to the <+E2 >andbook1 The Corld0s eligions 'here
'e find the follo'ing statements1
The snake 'as a fertility symbol in histori&al times in ,urope$ the
:iddle ,ast$ +ndia and China .as the dragon/ (((
The original Creator)-od 'as kno'n among all the +ndo)
,uropean nations( >is first name 'as Dyaus ?itar .0di!ine father0/(
By metaphor and simile other names 'ere added( -radually story)
tellers embellished their tales 'ith lo!e and Fealousy and 'ar and
drunkenness$ and so the mythologies appeared( The earth be&ame
-od0s bride$ attra&ted 'orship to herself as 0the queen of hea!en0$
and added se% to 'orship in her fertility &ults(
JThe <+E2 >andbook1 The Corld0s eligions$ pp( 29$32K
This at first seems strange( All the an&estors of the 5e's ) men like Abraham$ +saa&
and 5a&ob ) 'ere herders( "o 'hy should one of the oldest stories in 5e'ish
s&ripture in&lude mention of a snake$ a key symbol in an&ient &rop farmer religion
'here 6'orship6 in&luded se% aimed at en&ouraging the gods to make the land
more fertileI But it is a further &lue and one 'hi&h 'e need to keep at the front of
our minds(
Cikipedia also pro!ides some &lues to the identity of the forbidden fruit 'hi&h$
&ontrary to &ommon supposition$ is no'here in the Bible stated to ha!e been an
apple1
+n the Talmud$ se!eral opinions are proposed as to the identity of
the fruit1 abbi :eir says that the fruit 'as a grape ((( abbi
2e&hemia says that the fruit 'as a fig ((( abbi *ehuda proposes
that the fruit 'as 'heat (((
+n Cestern Christian art$ the fruit of the tree is &ommonly depi&ted
as the apple$ 'hi&h originated in &entral Asia( This depi&tion may
ha!e originated as a <atin pun ) by eating the malum .apple/$ ,!e
&ontra&ted mSlum .e!il/ ) or simply be&ause of religious artists0
poeti& li&en&e( JCikipedia$ Tree of the kno'ledge of good and e!ilK
To pursue the referen&e to the Talmud$ 'e turn to the 5e'ish 'ebsite halakhah(&om
'hi&h quotes as follo's from Tra&tate Berakoth$ Golio 70a of the Babylonian
Talmud1
+t has been taught1 ( :eir holds that the tree of 'hi&h Adam ate
'as the !ine$ sin&e the thing that most &auses 'ailing to a man is
'ine$ as it says$ And he drank of the 'ine and 'as drunken
J-enesis 3121K( ( 2ehemiah says it 'as the fig tree$ so that they
repaired their misdeed 'ith the instrument of it$ as it says$ And
they se'ed fig lea!es together J-enesis 319K( ( 5udah says it 'as
'heat$ sin&e a &hild does not kno' ho' to &all 0father and mother0
until it has had a taste of &orn(
This presents us 'ith three possibilities( Girst$ that -enesis 2)3 gi!es the only
!ersion of the story there has e!er been$ 'ith the fruit0s implied identity being
grapes and 'ith Adam and ,!e0s sudden a'areness of their nakedness e%plained by
their ha!ing be&ome drunk and then ha!ing had their first se%ual en&ounter(
"e&ond$ that there 'ere originally three independent !ersions of the story ) 'ith the
fruit being grapes$ figs and 'heat respe&ti!ely ) 'hi&h 'ere teles&oped together
'hen -enesis 'as put into its present form( And third$ that there 'as only one
an&ient !ersion of the story$ in 'hi&h the fruit 'as spe&ified as either grapes .the
most likely/ or figs or 'heat$ and that this earlier !ersion 'as rewritten at the time
-enesis 'as &ompiled$ 'ith the identity of the fruit deliberately left !ague and thus
open to a !ariety of later interpretations(
All this said$ then$ 'hat sorts of preliminary hypotheses &an 'e dra' upI <et me
suggest si% and$ on the basis of 'hat 'e ha!e found out thus far$ make some 'ild
guesses about their respe&ti!e probabilities(
Girst$ that -enesis 2)3 is a literally true a&&ount of real e!ents 'hi&h took
pla&e some ;$000 years ago(Probability1 0Q
"e&ond$ that it is an an&ient man)made myth to 6try to e%plain the e!il
and suffering in the 'orld6 .Cardinal ?ell/(Probability1 10Q
Third$ that it 'as di&tated by -od to :oses on :ount "inai in around the 13th
&entury B(C( and that -od intended it to be read as either poetry or parable$ 'here
by 6parable6 + ha!e in mind 5esus0 parables on 'hi&h 5ohn Drane 'rites as follo's
in his book 5esus and the four -ospels1
5esus used parables in the same 'ay as a modern prea&her uses
illustrations( They 'ere not intended to &on!ey a hidden meaning
in e!ery detail$ but simply to illustrate and dri!e home a parti&ular
point( J5ohn Drane$ 5esus and the four -ospels$ p( 102K
and 'here$ if it is indeed a parable$ -od0s 6parti&ular point6 under this
hypothesis 'ould be the need to repent after 'e sin( Probability1 20Q
Gourth$ that -enesis 2)3 'as 'ritten from s&rat&h by 5e'ish priests at
some time bet'een the 13th and 4th &enturies B(C( and 'as intended to
be read as either poetry or parable( Probability1 20Q
Gifth$ that it 'as re'ritten by 5e'ish priests 'ho teles&oped together as
many as three earlier !ersions of the story$ presumably 'hen -enesis
'as put into its present form in the 4th &entury B(C( Probability1 10Q
"i%th$ that it 'as re'ritten by 4th &entury B(C( 5e'ish priests from a
single earlier !ersion and 'as intended to be read as a parable about
repentan&e and$ perhaps also in part$ as some kind of manifesto relating
to a pressing issue fa&ing the nation at that time( Probability1 70Q
0ld Testament !arables
+ shall pursue that si%th hypothesis in the ne%t three &hapters$ taking the !ie' that
'e should see the Adam and ,!e story in -enesis 2)3 as being on a par 'ith the
parables of 5esus in the 2e' Testament( But + &lose this present &hapter by saying
something about t'o Eld Testament parables(
The parable of the !ineyard in +saiah 411)9 reads as follo's .and &an be &ompared
'ith 5esus0 parable of the Ci&ked Tenants$ see Chapter 4/1
:y belo!ed had a !ineyard on a !ery fertile hill( >e digged it and
&leared it of stonesB and planted it 'ith &hoi&e !inesB he built a
'at&hto'er in the midst of it$ and he'ed out a 'ine !at in itB and
he looked for it to yield grapes$ but it yielded 'ild grapes(
And no'$ E inhabitants of 5erusalem and men of 5udah$ Fudge$ +
pray you$ bet'een me and my !ineyard( Chat more 'as there to
do for my !ineyard$ that + ha!e not done in itI Chen + looked to it
to yield grapes$ 'hy did it yield 'ild grapesI
And no' + tell you 'hat + 'ill do to my !ineyard( + 'ill remo!e its
hedge$ and it shall be de!ouredB + 'ill break do'n its 'all$ and it
shall be trampled do'n( + 'ill make it a 'aste ((( briers and thorns
shall gro' upB + 'ill also &ommand the &louds that they rain no
rain upon it(
Gor the !ineyard of the <ED of hosts is the house of +srael$ and
the men of 5udah are his pleasant plantingB and he looked for
Fusti&e$ but behold$ bloodshedB for righteousness$ but behold$ a &ry(
The author of +saiah 1)33 'rote this parable as a &omment on the siege of
5erusalem by the Assyrians in 901 B(C( +ts message 'as that$ 'hile -od had spared
the &ity on that o&&asion$ if its people &ontinued to yield 6'ild grapes6
.'orshipping false gods/ they 'ould one day pay a high pri&e(
Gollo'ing the final &apture of 5erusalem by the Babylonian king 2ebu&hadneAAar
in 489 B(C($ the 5e'ish priests 'ill qui&kly ha!e seen +saiah 411)9 as a prophe&y
about the e%ile to Babylon( "o this parable 'ill ha!e been !ery mu&h in the minds
of those 'ho .under the si%th hypothesis abo!e/ later re'rote the Adam and ,!e
story$ and may 'ell ha!e been a fa&tor in their de&ision to re'rite it too as a
parable(
The !ery different parable in 2 "amuel 1211)7$ 'ith 'hi&h the prophet 2athan
repro!ed @ing Da!id after he &ommitted adultery 'ith Bathsheba and then
arranged for her husband to die in battle$ runs as follo's1
There 'ere t'o men in a &ertain &ity$ the one ri&h and the other
poor( The ri&h man had !ery many flo&ks and herdsB but the poor
man had nothing but one little e'e lamb$ 'hi&h he had bought(
And he brought it up$ and it gre' up 'ith him and his &hildrenB it
used to eat of his morsel$ and drink from his &up$ and lie in his
bosom$ and it 'as like a daughter to him(
2o' there &ame a tra!eller to the ri&h man$ and he 'as un'illing
to take one of his o'n flo&k or herd to prepare for the 'ayfarer
'ho had &ome to him$ but he took the poor man0s lamb$ and
prepared it for the man 'ho had &ome to him(
Da!id is understandably furious at hearing this and !o's to punish the ri&h man$
'hereupon 2athan e%plains that the story is in fa&t about Da!id himself( And Fust
as the pre!ious parable from +saiah 411)9 in&luded the 'arning that -od punishes
those 'ho displease him$ so too 2athan sets out in 2 "amuel 12111)17 the
punishment for Da!id0s sins1
Thus says the <ED$ 0Behold$ + 'ill raise up e!il against you out
of your o'n houseB and + 'ill take your 'i!es before your eyes$
and gi!e them to your neighbour (((0
The <ED has put a'ay your sinB you shall not die( 2e!ertheless$
be&ause by this deed you ha!e utterly s&orned the <ED$ the &hild
that is born to you shall die(
And the a&&ount goes on to say that -od 6stru&k6 the &hild Bathsheba had borne to
Da!id and that it be&ame si&k and died a 'eek later(
,!en se&ular historians agree that 2 "amuel 11)12$ gi!ing the a&&ount of Da!id0s
dual sin and the death of his first son by Bathsheba$ is genuine history( ,%&ept that
they point out$ as 21st &entury Christians ought also to a&&ept$ that -od did not kill
the &hildB indeed that 2athan already kne' the &hild 'as dying 'hen he 'ent to
&onfront Da!id( >o'e!er those around Da!id 'ill doubtless ha!e belie!ed that the
&hild0s death 'as no &oin&iden&e and 'as indeed punishment for his sins(
Both these parables gi!e us a 'indo' into the Adam and ,!e story( Cith no notion
of resurre&tion until the 2nd &entury B(C($ most of the Eld Testament naturally sa'
-od as punishing sins in this life1 usually punishing the perpetrator or$ failing
'hi&h$ punishing his or her immediate des&endants( >en&e the punishment of
Adam and ,!e(
But e!en in parables like these$ -od is sho'n as a -od 'ho forgi!es those 'ho
repent( -od must ha!e pri&ked Da!id0s &ons&ien&e many times during the months
after he sinned$ but it finally took a &oin&idental tragedy to Folt him into
repentan&e( *et he did e!entually repent$ as 'e see both from the latter part of 2
"amuel 12 and from ?salm 41( And those 'ho later re'rote the Adam and ,!e
story 'ill similarly ha!e 'anted to make their ne' !ersion in part a parable about
repentan&e(
Chapter 12 An Ear1ier ,er"ion of the Adam and
Eve Stor8

Ce shall in this &hapter e%amine the hypothesis that the Adam and ,!e story 'as
re'ritten by 4th &entury B(C( 5e'ish priests from a single earlier !ersion( And 'e
begin by taking a &loser look at the !ie' of Bible s&holars that the present fi!e
books of the ?entateu&h .-enesis$ ,%odus$ <e!iti&us$ 2umbers and Deuteronomy/
'ere all &ompiled at that same time from four pre)e%isting sour&e do&uments J$ E$
D and P( Ce 'ill &onsider t'o questions1 Chy 'as this 'ork doneI And ho' 'as
it doneI
'hy did the (ewish !riests re/organi>e the material in J. E. D and P)
At first it seems strange that the 5e'ish priests 'ould ha!e re)organiAed the
material in J$ E$ D and P( Ce do not kno' e%a&tly 'hat 'as in these four
do&uments$ but at least they 'ere &onsistent in the titles they used for -od( And 'e
may 'ell think that they &ould hardly ha!e been mu&h more of a hot&hpot&h than
the present ?entateu&h 'ith bits of history stre'n all o!er the pla&e and almost
impossible to pie&e together(
The best e%planation for the priests0 re)organiAing the material in J$ E$ D and P
seems to be that they did so as part of preparations for the return from Babylon to
5erusalem 'hi&h took pla&e around the middle of the 4th &entury B(C( And that
there 'ere things in those do&uments 'hi&h needed to be ironed out if the return
'as not to be 6ba&k to square one6 in terms of the 5e'ish nation0s loyalty .or la&k
of loyalty/ to their -od(
+ shall ha!e mu&h more to say on this later$ but the follo'ing thumbnail sket&h of
5e'ish history might be helpful at this point1
20th &entury B(C( Abraham turns from the false gods of his an&estors to
start 'orshipping the one true -od(
19th &entury B(C( Abraham0s des&endants no' in ,gypt$ 'here they are
later ensla!ed(
13th &entury B(C( :oses leads Abraham0s des&endants out of ,gypt and
into the 'ilderness1 they are still a herder nation at
this point and .largely/ loyal to the -od of Abraham(
12th &entury B(C( +n!asion and &onquest of Canaan$ the promised land$
'hose nati!e inhabitants ) the Canaanites ) are &rop
farmers and 'orship false &rop farmer gods(
10th &entury B(C( @ingdom of Da!id splits after "olomon0s death into
separates states +srael .northern kingdom/ and 5udah
.southern kingdom/( By no'$ most people in both
+srael and 5udah ha!e s'it&hed from herding to &rop
farming and some ha!e abandoned -od and started
'orshipping the false Canaanite gods$ the Baals(
3th &entury B(C( J 'ritten in 5udah(
+srael0s rulers .espe&ially Ahab and his queen 5eAebel/
en&ourage Baal 'orship(
8th &entury B(C( +srael &onquered by the Assyrians(
5udah0s people .'ho &an no' properly be &alled 5e's/
are by no' also in&reasingly 'orshipping the Baals(
;th &entury B(C( 5udah &onquered by the Babylonians 'ho$ after
&apturing 5erusalem in 489 B(C($ deport its entire
population to Babylon to begin a long period of e%ile(
4th &entury B(C( "ome 5e's ha!e returned to 5erusalem$ but most
remain in Babylon e!en though both &ities are by no'
part of the ?ersian empire(
"o the re)organiAation of the material in J$ E$ D and P took pla&e in Babylon at a
time 'hen a thought uppermost in the minds of the 5e'ish priests in!ol!ed must
ha!e been to lay the ground'ork for ensuring that the e!entual return to 5erusalem
'ould not lead to a return to the Baals(
5ow did the (ewish !riests re/organi>e the material in J. E. D and P)
The !ery fa&t that the fi!e books of the present ?entateu&h are su&h a hot&hpot&h
underlines the point that the 4th &entury 5e'ish priests in Babylon 'ere not at
liberty to take a 6root and bran&h6 approa&h to re)organiAing the material in J. E. D
and P( Gor one thing$ they 'ere as mu&h in the dark about 13th &entury B(C(
history as 'e are today and had little &hoi&e but to &opy e%a&tly 'hat they found
about it in their four sour&e do&uments( And for another$ 'hat the E%ford Bible
Commentary says about the authors of the -ospels in the 1st &entury A(D( must
also ha!e applied largely to the 5e'ish priests in the 4th &entury B(C(1
The 2e' Testament 'riters J'hen quoting Eld Testament
passagesK 'ere using te&hniques of s&riptural interpretation &urrent
in 5udaism at the time ((( reading s&ripture as sheer 'ords$ -od)
gi!en$ 'ith only a minimal sense of histori&al &onte%t(
This e%plains 'hy the material in the t'o original 2oah Glood stories .one from P$
the other from J/ is spli&ed together in -enesis ;)3 'ith no attempt to deal 'ith the
resulting repetitions and &ontradi&tions(
There is$ ho'e!er$ a further parallel bet'een the 'ays in 'hi&h the 6synopti&6
-ospels .:atthe'$ :ark and <uke/ and the ?entateu&h 'ere &ompiled( A&&ording
to 2e' Testament s&holars$ :ark0s -ospel 'as 'ritten first and then :atthe' and
<uke dre' most of their material from :ark and from another do&ument labelled
Q( This &ertainly this e%plains 'hy there are many passages &ommon to all three of
these -ospels .often identi&al 'ord)for)'ord/ and many other passages &ommon to
:atthe' and <uke but not found in :ark( But these s&holars also stress that
:atthe'0s and <uke0s &opyings from :ark and Q 'ere far from being a matter of
6&ut and paste6( At times$ for e%ample$ they &hose to rearrange material to bolster
their o'n theologi&al !ie'points1 a &lear &ase being :atthe'0s bringing together a
lot of material from Q .left s&attered in <uke/ into 5esus0 6"ermon on the :ount6
to en&ourage his readers to liken this to :oses0 re&ei!ing the Ten Commandments
on :ount "inai(
"o the &ompilation of the ?entateu&h 'as also unlikely to ha!e been a pure matter
of 6&ut and paste6( Ce &an already see this in the 'ay that the t'o &learly
un&onne&ted stories in -enesis 2)3 and -enesis 7 are linked by making Cain and
Abel the sons of Adam and ,!e$ despite all the problems this raises$ not least that
of 6Cain0s 'ife6( But in terms of our hypothesis$ the key issue is 'hether the Adam
and ,!e story in J 'as radi&ally re'ritten 'hen brought into -enesis(
Evidence that changes were made to the original Adam and Eve story
A number of things point to the 4th &entury B(C( priests0 ha!ing made some radi&al
&hanges to the Adam and ,!e story 'hen taking it from J( There is the title 6The
<ED -od6$ not found else'here in -enesis( There is the -arden of ,den 'hi&h$
as mentioned in Chapter 1;$ is not referred to by name in any pre)e%ile book of the
Bible( And there 'ere four things in the original J !ersion of the Adam and ,!e
story .more on its probable &ontent in a moment/ 'hi&h 'ould ha!e prompted the
4th &entury B(C( priests to gi!e it spe&ial treatment in the &onte%t of laying the
ground'ork for the e!entual return to 5erusalem(
Girst$ the mention in the original J !ersion of the story of -od0s e%pelling Adam
and ,!e from their garden( The priests 'ould .initially/ ha!e dra'n a parallel
bet'een this and the e%ile to Babylon in 489 B(C( And they 'ould also ha!e tied it
in 'ith the parable of -od0s threat to destroy the !ineyard .referring to 5udah/ in
+saiah 4 if it &ontinued to yield 6'ild grapes6( The key to a su&&essful 5e'ish return
to 5erusalem 'as for the priests to get their people to repent of their past sins )
'orshipping the Baals ) and to rene' their pa&t of loyalty to the one true -od(
"e&ond$ the mention of in&reased &hildbearing1 more on this belo' and in Chapter
18(
Third$ the mention in the J !ersion of a snake$ a maFor symbol of &rop farmer
religion( This pro!ided the priests 'ith further ammunition in their &ondemnation
of e!ery aspe&t of Canaanite religion$ to ensure that their people 'ould ne!er again
be enti&ed a'ay from their -od(
Gourth$ the spe&ifi& identity of the forbidden fruit in the J !ersion( As 'e shall see$
this had in fa&t been one of the main reasons 'hy so many 5e's had turned a'ay
from their -od in the first pla&e( And the 5e'ish priests realiAed that this 'as
something that definitely had to be &hanged(
The e*act identity of the forbidden fruit
To e%plain that fourth point$ let us no' return to the Talmud0s three alternati!e
identifi&ations of the forbidden fruit1 grapes$ figs$ 'heat(
+ suggested in Chapter 1; that grapes seem initially to be the most likely type of
fruit in any single earlier !ersion of the Adam and ,!e story( Ce &an imagine that
by the time ,!e finally su&&umbed to the temptation to pi&k the grapes they 'ere
already o!er)ripe$ that as she and Adam ate them they qui&kly be&ame drunk$ and
that the ine!itable then follo'ed$ after 'hi&h they &ould hardly es&ape the fa&t that
they 'ere naked( +ndeed this is the predominant s&enario found in 5e'ish
&ommentaries on -enesis 2)3( And e!en those 5e'ish &ommentators 'ho prefer
the idea of figs as the forbidden fruit still see the first sin as partly se%ual in nature(
Cheat$ on the other hand$ seems initially an unlikely alternati!e( +t does not gro'
on a tree and is not 'hat most of us 'ould think of as a fruit( Ce might$ 'hen
young$ ha!e been tempted to steal an apple from our neighbour0s tree on a hot
summer0s day$ but hardly an ear of 'heat( And abbi 5udah0s e%planation that 6a
&hild does not kno' ho' to &all 0father and mother0 until it has had a taste of &orn6
s&ar&ely sounds &on!in&ing( :oreo!er$ 'heat seems a totally illogi&al &andidate
for the role of the forbidden fruit( All &ommentators agree that -enesis 2)3
identifies Adam as a &rop farmer$ indeed as the !ery first &rop farmer( "o 'hy
'ould -od tell him not to eat 'heatI But 'hen 'e re)read the Cain and Abel story
in -enesis 7$ 'heat suddenly emerges as in fa&t the prime &andidate(
%ro! farmers and herders
The Cain and Abel story in -enesis 7 runs briefly as follo's1

2o' Adam kne' ,!e his 'ife$ and she &on&ei!ed and bore Cain$
saying$ 6+ ha!e gotten a man 'ith the help of the <ED(6 And
again$ she bore his brother Abel( 2o' Abel 'as a keeper of sheep$
and Cain a tiller of the ground( +n the &ourse of time Cain brought
to the <ED an offering of the fruit of the ground$ and Abel
brought of the firstlings of his flo&k and of their fat portions( And
the <ED had regard for Abel and his offering$ but for Cain and
his offering he had no regard( "o Cain 'as !ery angry$ and his
&ountenan&e fell ((( Cain said to Abel his brother$ 6<et us go out
into the field(6 And 'hen they 'ere in the field$ Cain rose up
against his brother Abel and killed him ((( And the <ED said$ (((
6And no' you ((( shall be a fugiti!e and a 'anderer on the earth(6
Gour points emerge here( Girst$ the identifi&ation of Abel as a herder and Cain as a
&rop farmer( "e&ond$ the des&ription of 'heat as 6the fruit of the ground6( Third$
that -od appro!es the herder0s offering of lambs$ but not the &rop farmer0s offering
of 'heat( And fourth$ that the herder and &rop farmer$ brothers or not$ are &learly
on !ery bad terms(
+ mentioned in Chapter 1; that it is strange$ 'ith all the 5e's0 an&estors being
herders$ to find mention in -enesis 2)3 of a snake$ a key symbol in an&ient &rop
farmer religion 'here 'orship in&luded se% aimed at en&ouraging the gods to make
the land more fertile( But no' 'e &an see 'hy( The Cain and Abel story is &learly
an an&ient herder myth about the 'i&kedness of their &rop farmer ri!als( Crop
farmers are portrayed as !iolent thugs 'ho insult the one and only true -od$ the
-od of the herders$ 'ith their disgusting religious pra&ti&es and paltry offerings(
Cith -enesis 7 seen as an an&ient herder myth about -od punishing Cain$ a
'i&ked &rop farmer$ 'e &an guess that the 2oah Glood story in -enesis ;)3 may
'ell also be an old herder myth( 2oah is &learly a herder1 at that time only a herder
'ould ha!e bothered to res&ue animals .his o'n li!esto&k/ during a flood( And the
people dro'ned in the Glood$ destroyed be&ause of their 'i&kedness$ are naturally
all &rop farmers(
eturning to -enesis 2)3$ 'e therefore no' ha!e the possibility that the Adam and
,!e story is again an an&ient herder myth( "o$ bearing in mind our hypothesis$ 'e
ha!e t'o issues to &onsider(
Girst$ 'hether there &ould ha!e been an earlier herder myth !ersion of the story$
'ith Adam forbidden to eat 'heat$ 6the fruit of the ground6( And 'ith -od
punishing Adam after he de&ides to be&ome a &rop farmer(
"e&ond$ 'hether the present !ersion of the story &ould be a 4th &entury B(C(
re'riting of the earlier myth designed to transform it into a parable about
repentan&e( A &onne&ted issue here is 'hether the re'ritten !ersion 'as also
intended to ser!e as a manifesto related to the future return of the e%iled 5e's to
5erusalem( And my suggestion$ either 'ay$ is that one of the main reasons for
&arrying out the re'riting e%er&ise 'as to remo!e the idea that -od hated &rop
farmers1 a maFor &ause of so many 5e's0 ha!ing turned to the Baals in the &enturies
before the e%ile(
An earlier herder myth version of the Adam and Eve story)
Chen a notoriously immoral man dies at a &omparati!ely young age or in a freak
a&&ident$ many Christians 'ill think .and some 'ill a&tually say/ that this 'as the
hand of -od rea&hing out to punish him( And there are e!en a fe' Christians 'ho
'ill de&lare that this earthquake or that flood 'as di!ine retribution for sins
pre!iously &ommitted by the !i&tims( "o if nonsense like this &an be talked e!en in
today0s 6enlightened6 times$ 'e &an easily imagine ho' the an&ient herders 'ill
ha!e !ie'ed the misfortunes 'hi&h befell the early &rop farmers(
En the subFe&t of these misfortunes$ 5ohn >ay'ood 'rites as follo's in The
+llustrated >istory of ,arly :an1
The dis&o!ery of agri&ulture 'as not an unmi%ed blessing(
"ur!i!ing skeletal e!iden&e sho's that hunter)gatherers of the
=pper ?alaeolithi& period 'ere 'ell)nourished and li!ed healthy
li!es$ 'hereas early &rop farmers suffered redu&ed life e%pe&tan&y(
and then gi!es four reasons for this1
1( :alnutrition and stunted gro'th( The tenden&y to rely on a
limited range of high)yielding &rops plus the in&reased birth
rate .e%tra hands to 'ork the land/ meant that 'hen the
&rops failed$ there 'ere too many people to make a return to
hunting and gathering a pra&ti&al alternati!e(
2( Esteoarthritis of the lo'er ba&k &aused by hard manual
'ork1 espe&ially 'ith 'omen 'ho spent hours a day bent
o!er grindstones$ pro&essing grain$ and for 'hom in&reased
&hildbearing also took its toll(
3( +nfe&tious diseases$ 'hi&h spread more easily in the
unsanitary &onditions of the permanent settlements(
7( Tooth de&ay$ &aused by star&h)ri&h dietsB also teeth 'ore
do'n more qui&kly as a result of eating flour &ontaining grit
from grindstones( JThe +llustrated >istory of ,arly :an$ p( 10;K
Ce &an safely assume that the herders 'ill ha!e seen the punishing hand of -od in
e!ery &rop failure$ Fust as -enesis ;)3 sees the hand of -od in the 2oah Glood(
And that the herders 'ill ha!e seen e!erything else in the abo!e list as
punishments for the &rop farmers0 not being herders(
"o &ould there ha!e been an earlier herder myth !ersion of the Adam and ,!e
story$ featuring a herder -od 'ho hated &rop farmersI There may be some non)
bibli&al e!iden&e for this idea .more on this in a moment/( And along 'ith the
points that the 5e's0 an&estors 'ere all herders and that the Cain and Abel story
and the 2oah Glood story are still herder myths$ three pie&es of e!iden&e in
-enesis 2)3 seem to support this !ie'(
Girst$ the statement in -enesis 311; that -od punished ,!e by 6greatly multiplying
her pain in &hildbearing6( This do!etails e%a&tly 'ith 5ohn >ay'ood0s mention of
the in&reased birth rate .e%tra hands to 'ork the land/ and of the toll this took on
the health of the &rop farmer 'omen(
"e&ond$ the a&&ount of -od0s punishment of Adam in -enesis 3119)231
And to Adam he said$ 6Cursed is the ground be&ause of youB in toil
you shall eat of it all the days of your life ((( you shall eat bread till
you return to the ground(6 ((( Therefore the <ED -od sent him
forth from the garden of ,den(
Ce &an almost hear an an&ient herder saying to a &rop farmer he is dri!ing a'ay
from his land$ 6*ou 'ant to be a man of the soil and eat bread all your lifeI Then
be one$ and die one( But not in my ba&kyardH6
Third$ and abo!e all$ the intriguing passage in -enesis 2118)201
Then the <ED -od said$ 6+t is not good that the man should be
alone1 + 'ill make him a helper fit for him(6 "o out of the ground
the <ED -od formed e!ery beast of the field ((( and brought
them to the man ((( but there 'as not found a helper fit for him(
This passage makes little sense and is therefore &ru&ial to understanding the Adam
and ,!e story( As already mentioned$ a horse 'ould ha!e been far more 6helpful6
to &rop farmer Adam than a 'oman( The only 'ay -enesis 2118)20 makes sense is
if there 'as indeed an earlier !ersion of the Adam and ,!e story 'ith the fruit
spe&ified as 'heat and the story a myth about the herder -od punishing the !ery
first &rop farmers( =nder this s&enario$ 'hat Adam0s reFe&tion of the animals really
meant 'as that he 'as refusing to look after them$ refusing to be a herder( And
-od0s real reason for telling Adam not to eat the fruit ) the 'heat ) 'as be&ause he
had planted it spe&ifi&ally and solely for the animals(
5ohn >ay'ood gi!es the follo'ing pi&ture of the origins of &rop farming and
herding in the 2ear ,ast$ both beginning at about the same time1
Cild &ereals ha!e small grains 'hi&h s&atter on the ground 'hen
ripe( By sele&ti!ely planting the grains from these plants$ early
farmers 'ere able .bet'een 8000 and 9000 B(C(/ to breed high)
yielding strains of &ereals 'ith seedheads 'hi&h did not s&atter
'hen har!ested(
-raAing animals like sheep$ goats and &attle$ that instin&ti!ely
follo' a leader$ are the most suitable for domesti&ation( ?robably
the first step of domesti&ation 'as restri&ting the mo!ement of
'ild herds$ perhaps by penning animals and keeping them
ali!e until they 'ere needed for food( After this &ame sele&ti!e
breeding for desirable &hara&teristi&s su&h as do&ility(
+n &ontrast$ 'e &an imagine that an earlier herder myth !ersion of the Adam and
,!e story 'ould ha!e run roughly as follo's1
:ankind started off as hunters$ 'ith the sear&h for food a daily
and dangerous struggle( "o e!entually the <ED taught mankind
to be herders(
Girst$ he taught them ho' to bring 'ater up from under the ground
by digging 'ells(
Then he put ea&h family unit into en&losed gardens 'ith spe&ially)
pro!ided do&ile animals for them to look after(
And finally the <ED planted 'heat in ea&h of the gardens for
these animals to eat and told the herders not to eat it themsel!es$
adding that if they disobeyed him then they 'ould die(
But one parti&ular &ouple$ Adam and his 'ife$ &ould not be
bothered to look after the animals( And a smooth)talking 6snake6
&on!in&ed Adam0s 'ife that she 'ould not die if she ate the 'heat(
"o she gathered some$ &ooked it and shared it 'ith Adam(
+mmediately their eyes 'ere opened to the 6benefits6 of &rop
farming(
"oon after'ards the <ED &ame into the garden$ found the
animals star!ing and be&ame !ery angry( And he punished all the
parties in!ol!ed(
The 6snake6 'as punished by ha!ing its legs &ut off(
The <ED said to Adam$ 6*ou 'ant to be a man of the soil and
eat bread all your lifeI Then be one$ and die one6( And he dro!e
Adam and his 'ife from the garden and &ondemned them to
s&rat&hing a meagre li!ing from the unfriendly soil of land
else'here and to early deaths(
And the <ED further punished Adam0s 'ife by making her suffer
the pain of &hildbirth mu&h more frequently than if she had obeyed
him and been &ontent 'ith life as the 'ife of a herder(
The first point to make about this re&onstru&tion is that Adam and his 'ife .not yet
gi!en the name ,!e/ are here not the !ery first man and 'oman$ but rather the first
&rop farmers(
A se&ond point is that the &ouple0s sin is here that of abandoning the animals and
then 6stealing6 their only food sour&e$ the 'heat(
A third point is that the 6snake6 'as probably$ in the !ery earliest !ersion of the
herder myth$ a fertility &ult 'it&hdo&tor dressed in a snake &ostume to lead the &rop
farmer 6'orship6 .as mentioned abo!e$ the snake 'as seen as a fertility symbol/(
The herders must ha!e espe&ially hated these 6talking snakes6$ seeing them as
leading people astray$ into &rop farming(
And a final point is that + ha!e gi!en -od the title 6The <ED6 be&ause$ on our
hypothesis that an earlier !ersion of the Adam and ,!e story 'as re'ritten into its
present form in the 4th &entury B(C($ the priests in!ol!ed in the re'riting 'ould
ha!e taken that earlier !ersion from J(
The !resent Adam and Eve story a !arable about re!entance)
Thus far in this &hapter + ha!e set out a &ase for 4th &entury B(C( 5e'ish priests$
'hen re)organiAing the material in J. E. D and P into the present fi!e books of the
?entateu&h$ ha!ing paid parti&ular attention and made maFor &hanges to the te%t of
the original Adam and ,!e story in J( + ha!e argued that the original !ersion in J
'as an an&ient herder myth about -od punishing the earliest &rop farmers$ 'ith the
snake representing a &rop farmer 'it&hdo&tor and the forbidden fruit identified as
'heat$ originally pro!ided for the herders0 animals to eat( And + ha!e suggested
that one of the main reasons for &hanging Adam and ,!e from the first &rop
farmers to the first man and 'oman 'as to remo!e the idea that -od hated &rop
farmers and thus ensure that$ after the e!entual return to 5erusalem$ the 5e'ish
people 'ould remain loyal to their -od(

+ also suggested abo!e that$ in re'riting the old Adam and ,!e herder myth$ the
priests reframed it as a parable about repentan&e1 not as a myth$ not as poetry$ and
&ertainly not as literal truth( + no' gi!e fi!e reasons for this suggestion$ 'ith some
of them rele!ant e!en if our hypothesis 'ere instead that -od di&tated -enesis 2)3
to :oses on :ount "inai(
Girst$ the use of the title 6The <ED -od6 seems to mark -enesis 2)3 off from the
t'o myths in -enesis 7 and -enesis ;)3$ emphasiAing that the ne' !ersion of the
Adam and ,!e story is not to be read as a myth(
"e&ond$ there is &ertainly a lot of poetry in 5e'ish s&ripture$ espe&ially in the Book
of ?salms( But there are se!eral reasons for ruling out the idea that -enesis 2)3 &an
be read as poetry( :ore on this later in the &hapter(
Third$ the &ontinuation of the human ra&e 'ould ha!e required the &ouple0s
&hildren to &ommit 6full sibling6 in&est .prohibited in <e!iti&us and Deuteronomy$
and not &ommitted by anyone else in the Bible/( This suggests that the author ne!er
intended the idea that Adam 'as made from the ground and ,!e from one of his
ribs to be read as literally true(
Gourth$ the mention of the talking snake &learly points to the author of -enesis 2)3
.espe&ially if a 'ell)edu&ated priest/ 'anting it to be read as a parable1 Balaam0s
talking ass in 2umbers 22 is in a different &ategoryB 'e all kno' 'hat is being
6said6 by a braying ass 'ith its heels dug in( "imilarly$ the mention of -od0s
planting the mysterious tree of the kno'ledge of good and e!il and the tree of life
in the -arden$ and indeed of the -arden itself .'ith$ later$ 6the &herubim and a
flaming s'ord ((( to guard the 'ay to the tree of life6/$ points to the story being a
parable(

Gifth$ it seems that one of the main reasons for the priests0 re'riting of the earlier J
!ersion of the story 'as to make -od mu&h more attra&ti!e to the 5e'ish people(
"o it &ould ne!er ha!e been the intention that -od0s 6greatly multiplying ,!e0s pain
in &hildbearing6 'as to be read as literally true( En the &ontrary$ the 'hole point of
the re'ritten !ersion 'as to stress that -od is lo!ing and forgi!ing$ but does insist
on t'o things1 that 'e obey his &ommandmentsB and$ 'hen 'e break them$ that 'e
qui&kly repent( Certainly the present Adam and ,!e story makes best sense if read
as a parable 'ith the message that the real mistake the &ouple make is their failure
to repent 'hen -od gi!es them the &han&e to do so( And let us not forget1 !ie'ing
the story as a parable in no 'ay do'ngrades itB rather$ it ele!ates it to the same
le!el as 5esus0 parables(
But ha!ing said all that$ + ha!e to admit that the present Adam and ,!e story still
does not make &omplete sense e!en 'hen read as a parable( "e!eral questions still
remain unans'ered$ not least1
a( Chy does -od say that Adam 'ill die if he eats the fruitI
b( Chat do the snake0s tempting 'ords really meanI
&( Chy does Adam &all ,!e 6flesh of my flesh6I
d( Chy does -od punish the &ouple in the 'ay he doesI
e( Chat does the e%pulsion from the -arden really meanI
"o in the ne%t &hapter 'e shall e%amine the other side of our hypothesis1 that the
5e'ish priests in!ol!ed in the re'riting had t'o sets of readers in mind( Girst$
future generations 'hom they intended should read the story as a parable( And
se&ond their o'n generation$ the 5e's still in e%ile in Babylon in the early 4th
&entury B(C($ 'hom they 'anted to read the story as a parable and a manifesto for
their e!entual return to 5erusalem(
0ther evidence for an ancient herder myth about Adam and Eve)
<et me turn first$ though$ to a different question1 +s there any non)bibli&al e!iden&e
for an earlier herder myth !ersion of the Adam and ,!e storyI
The question arises from t'o &onsiderations( Girst$ that numerous &opies of the
-ilgamesh ,pi& ha!e been dis&o!ered by ar&haeologists telling the story of a maFor
flood in terms strikingly similar .at times/ to 'hat 'e find in the 2oah Glood
a&&ount( And se&ond that$ if the herder myth 'ent as far ba&k as the time of the
early &rop farmers$ it should ha!e been the &ommon property of all early herders in
the 2ear ,ast(
En the first point$ most &ultures ha!e myths about monster floods( "o the
-ilgamesh epi& 'as perhaps an urban myth rather than a herder myth( En this
basis the similarities 'ith the 2oah a&&ount may simply mean that$ 'hen the
5e'ish priests arri!ed in e%ile in Babylon in 489 B(C($ they &ame a&ross the
-ilgamesh ,pi& and borro'ed elements from it 'hen 'riting their ne' P !ersion
of the 2oah story from the earlier J !ersion(
En the se&ond point$ nomadi& herders 'ould hardly ha!e &arried around 'ritten
!ersions of their an&ient myths1 they 'ould ha!e handed them on by 'ord of
mouth( +t 'as only those !ery fe' herder nations that e!entually settled do'n in
lands of their o'n .usually through &onquest/ 'hi&h 'ould ha!e preser!ed their
an&ient myths( And$ along 'ith the an&estors of the 5e's$ t'o nations immediately
&ome to mind here(
Girst the Arabs$ 'ho ha!e their o'n !ersion of the Adam and ,!e story in the
Tur0Sn$ some'hat different to the a&&ount in -enesis 2)3( The garden is here in
hea!en$ 'ith Adam and ,!e0s e%pulsion being the time that their li!es on earth
begin( And Adam is here not at all a &ou&h potato and is indeed quite a noble
figure( But there are also many similarities bet'een the t'o !ersions and it 'ould
be going too far to suggest that the fa&t that the Tur0Sn has its o'n !ersion of the
story supports the idea of an early herder myth &ommon to all an&ient herder
nations(
"e&ond$ then$ the Aryans 'ho &onquered +ndia at mu&h the same time as the 5e's0
an&estors &onquered their promised land( The <+E2 >andbook1 The Corld0s
eligions pro!ides the follo'ing histori&al ba&kground1
+f 'e &ould look do'n on the an&ient 'orld in about 1400 BC,$
'e 'ould see ordinary men and 'omen still offering animal
sa&rifi&e as their normal 'ay of approa&hing -od or the gods(
The earliest literature in +ndia$ the "anskrit )edas$ pi&ture the
nomadi& Aryan tribes 'ho fought their 'ay east'ards a&ross the
+ndus and -anges plains( The head of the tribe offered animal
sa&rifi&e 'ith the same simpli&ity as Abraham(
Chen they settled in +ndia$ the Aryans de!eloped a regular
priesthood and the )edas are the hymns 'hi&h the priests &hanted
as the sa&rifi&ial smoke as&ended to -od( The later #edi& literature
has &ertainly be&ome polytheisti& by$ say$ 1000 BC,$ but the
earliest Aryans must ha!e been monotheists(
JThe <+E2 >andbook1 The Corld0s eligions$ p( 32K
The later #edi& literature does not ha!e an instantly re&ogniAable Adam and ,!e
story( But it does ha!e a 6Tree of 5i!a and Atman6 story$ on 'hi&h the rele!ant
Cikipedia arti&le states as follo's1
The ig #eda samhita 1(1;7(20)22$ :undaka =panishad 3(1(1)2$
and "!etas!atara =panishad 7(;)9$ speak of t'o birds$ one per&hed
on the bran&h of the tree$ 'hi&h signifies the body$ and eating its
fruit$ the other merely 'at&hing(
The first bird represents a 5i!a$ or indi!idual self$ or soul( "he has
a female nature$ being a sakti$ an energy of -od( Chen the Fi!a
be&omes distra&ted by the fruits .signifying sensual pleasure/$ she
momentarily forgets her lord and lo!er and tries to enFoy the fruit
Ja s'eet figK independently of him( This separating forgetfulness is
maha)maya$ or enthrallment$ spiritual death$ and &onstitutes the
fall of the Fi!a into the 'orld of material birth$ death$ disease and
old age(
The se&ond bird is the ?aramatman$ an aspe&t of -od 'ho
a&&ompanies e!ery li!ing being in the heart 'hile she remains in
the material 'orld( >e is the support of all beings and is beyond
sensual pleasure( JCikipedia$ Tree of 5i!a and AtmanK
"imilarities 'ith -enesis 2)3 here$ the mention of a fruit tree and a 6fall6 and the
female being blamed for &ausing the problem$ &annot easily be e%plained a'ay( "o$
gi!en that the Aryans 'ere a herder nation belie!ing .initially/ in Fust one -od$ is
the 5i!a and Atman story e!iden&e of there ha!ing been an early herder myth
!ersion of the Adam and ,!e story &ommon to all an&ient herder nationsI Could it
be that$ after they settled do'n and took up &rop farming themsel!es$ the Aryans
like'ise re'rote the myth to remo!e referen&e to a -od 'ho hated &rop farmersI
Ce &an ignore the superfi&ial similarity of the names of the players1 as mentioned
abo!e$ Adam0s 'ife 'as not gi!en the name ,!e until -enesis 2)3 itself 'as
'ritten( But the fa&t that the ig #eda 'ould not ha!e been kno'n to the 5e'ish
priests in Babylon &ertainly makes it possible that the same 2ear ,astern herder
myth had gi!en rise to both stories(
;uling out the idea that the Adam and Eve story is !oetry
+ &lose this &hapter by e%plaining 'hy + ruled out abo!e the possibility that the
Adam and ,!e story &an be treated as poetry(
:y understanding is that there are t'o types of poetry( The first type uses things
like rhyme$ rhythm$ alliteration or parallelism to daAAle and delight us$ 'hile
.usually/ still saying something meaningful( And the se&ond type uses the format
of prose but states a truth or tells a story in 'ords 'hi&h .often by e!oking a mood/
'e find equally &apti!ating(
2o one suggests that the Adam and ,!e story is poetry of the first type( But many
Christians e%press the !ie' that it is poetry of the se&ond type(
@eith Card .Chapter 14/$ for e%ample$ sees -enesis 1 and -enesis 2 as1
6poeti& a&&ounts 'ith a spiritual tea&hing of the dependen&e of all
things on -od6(
"o 'hy does Card put for'ard this ideaI And is he rightI
Before ans'ering these questions$ let me make an important point by &ommenting
on a paragraph from the Cate&hism of the Catholi& Chur&h1
J330K The a&&ount of the fall in -enesis 3 uses figurati!e language$
but affirms a prime!al e!ent$ a deed that took pla&e at the
beginning of the history of man(
and also on 5ohn Cyatt0s .see Chapter 29/ mention of1
6the poeti& imagery of the &reation narrati!es6(
=sing figurati!e language or poeti& imagery does not automati&ally make a pie&e
of 'riting poetry( +n the parable of the i&h :an and <aAarus .<uke 1;/$ and
sometimes e!en in his dire&t tea&hing$ 5esus referred to hell and hades in terms
.fire$ flames/ 'hi&h 'ere &learly figurati!e(
<iberal Christians suggest that -enesis 2)3 is poetry be&ause they see this as the
default option1 if the story is not literally true then it must be poetry( :oreo!er$
they see the Adam and ,!e story as poetry rather than parable for the same reason
that many see +saiah 411)9 as prophe&y rather than parable1 be&ause neither is
6labelled6 as a parable( The only 6labelled6 parable in the Eld Testament is
2athan0s parable rebuking @ing Da!id in 2 "amuel 12 .see Chapter 1;/( "o mu&h
so that the E%ford Bible Commentary makes a spe&ial point of stressing that +saiah
411)9 is a parable$ 6a rare literary form in the propheti& 'ritings6(
"o are liberal Christians right or 'rong in seeing -enesis 2)3 as poetryI + ha!e
four reasons for belie!ing that they are 'rong(
Girst$ no one suggests that the Cain and Abel story or the 2oah Glood story are
poetry( Chy$ then$ should -enesis 2)3 be seen as poetryI
"e&ond$ + &on&ede that -enesis 1 .taken from P/ uses the form of poetry$ 'ith its
refrains of 6-od sa' that it 'as good6 and 6there 'as e!ening and there 'as
morning (((6 But -enesis 2)3$ taken from J rather than from P$ &ontains no refrains
and is &learly a !ery different sort of 'riting(
Third$ 'hen the ?salms are translated into ,nglish in Bibles they lose all their
rhyme$ rhythm or 'hate!er( But most of them still remain poetry of the se&ond
type$ uplifting us 'ith their mood and passion( The Adam and ,!e story$ ho'e!er$
makes no su&h impa&t on us(

Gourth$ 5esus deli!ered all his tea&hing in the format either of plain language or of
parables( These t'o formats do seem to be the Bible0s preferred !ehi&les for
putting a&ross important pie&es of do&trine like the 6fall6$ regardless of 'hat might
be said about -enesis 1 and the ?salms(
Ginally$ 'e &an return to the statement by 5ohn Drane .Chapter 1;/ that 5esus0
parables 'ere intended 6to illustrate and dri!e home a parti&ular point6( The Adam
and ,!e story &ertainly has 6a parti&ular point61 the need to repent( But Drane
makes a further important statement1
J?rofessorsK Dodd and 5eremias emphasiAed the importan&e of
understanding the parables Jof 5esusK in their original histori&al
&onte%t ((( But other s&holars are no' beginning to realiAe that
there is a hidden dimension in the parables 'hi&h gi!es them a
distin&ti!e appeal not found in the rest of the 2e' Testament(
+t is generally true to say that before 'e &an be sure 'hat the 2e'
Testament means for us today$ 'e need to kno' 'hat it meant to
those 'ho first read it( But this is not really the &ase 'ith the
parables( They are more like the 'ork of a great artist than a self)
&ons&ious theologian$ and their &hara&ters and situations ha!e a
&orrespondingly uni!ersal quality that &an be understood by
anyone$ for they deal 'ith the basi& needs of human beings(
J5ohn Drane$ 5esus and the four -ospels$ p( 107K
The Adam and ,!e parable also has that uni!ersal quality$ 'hi&h loses nothing in
translation( And$ pro!ided they put aside the idea of a harsh -od$ most people see
readily enough 'hat the parable is really about(
Chapter 14 The T$o Facet" of the Pre"ent Adam
and Eve Stor

The o!erall theme of this book is that the most positi!e approa&h to the Adam and
,!e story is to see it as ha!ing been 'ritten by 5e'ish priests in Babylon in or
around 789 B(C( and ha!ing t'o fa&ets1 a parable about repentan&e and a manifesto
for a return to 5erusalem( "o let me begin 'ith a summary of 5e'ish history in the
;th and 4th &enturies B(C(
(ewish history in the 2th and ?th centuries $@%@
439 B(C( The Babylonian king 2ebu&hadneAAar &aptures 5erusalem(
>e deports @ing 5ehoia&hin and some other leading 5e's
and installs 5ehoia&hin0s un&le Uedekiah as !assal king(
489 B(C( Uedekiah re!olts(
2ebu&hadneAAar &aptures 5erusalem a se&ond time$ destroys
its Temple and &ity 'alls and &arries off its entire population
into e%ile in Babylon(
433 B(C( Cyrus of ?ersia &aptures Babylon(
438 B(C( Cyrus gi!es permission for the e%iled 5e's to return to
5erusalem(
An ad!an&e party of 5e's returns soon after'ards and starts
rebuilding the Temple$ but Canaanite harassment for&es the
'ork to be suspended(
422 B(C( Darius &omes to the ?ersian throne and$ t'o years later$
orders the Canaanites to stop harassing the 5e's(
41; B(C( Temple rebuilding &ompleted(
730 B(C( A ?ersian army in!ades -ree&e but suffers a humiliating
defeat in the Battle of :arathon(
789 B(C( ,gypt re!olts against ?ersian rule(
5e's in Babylon mark the 100th anni!ersary of the
destru&tion of 5erusalem and the beginning of their e%ile(
78; B(C( Darius dies and is su&&eeded by Ner%es(
793 B(C( A ?ersian army again in!ades -ree&e but suffers an e!en
more humiliating defeat in the Battle of ?lataea(
7;4 B(C( Ner%es dies and is su&&eeded by Arta%er%es(
748 B(C( ,Ara leads the main party of 5e'ish e%iles in Babylon ba&k
to 5erusalem(
777 B(C( 2ehemiah rebuilds 5erusalem0s &ity 'alls(
#uestions still unanswered even when reading Genesis 2/ as a !arable
+ ga!e in Chapter 19 a list of questions 'hi&h e!en reading the present Adam and
,!e story as a parable does not fully ans'er( "o &an these questions be ans'ered
by !ie'ing the story as also$ in part$ a manifesto for the return of the main party of
5e'ish e%iles to 5erusalemI
'hy does God say that Adam and Eve will die if they eat the fruit)
-od0s 'arning to Adam and ,!e that they 'ill die if they eat the forbidden fruit is a
problem for us be&ause of &ourse they do not die1 indeed$ a&&ording to -enesis 4$
Adam li!es for a further 330 yearsH
The &hild)friendly 6Adam and ,!e in the -arden of ,den6 lesson plan for "unday
"&hool tea&hers at dltk)bible(&om states as follo's1
-od did not mean that Adam and ,!e 'ould drop do'n dead the
moment they ate the fruit from the tree( >e meant that in time they
'ould die 'ithout >is "pirit d'elling in them(
But this is &learly not the 'ay that Adam and ,!e 'ould ha!e understood -od0s
'arning( And seeing -enesis 2)3 as$ in part$ a manifesto for the return to 5erusalem
pro!ides a far better e%planation of matters(
Chen the e%iled 5e's first arri!ed in Babylon in 489 B(C( they must ha!e had a
terrible time1 treated as third &lass &itiAens and hea!ily ta%ed( But after Cyrus of
?ersia &aptured Babylon in 433 B(C( matters 'ould ha!e be&ome !ery different(
The 5e's 'ould ha!e risen greatly in status and many doubtless qui&kly be&ame
prosperous businessmen(
Gor the 5e'ish priests$ ho'e!er$ this must ha!e led to t'o &on&erns( Girst$ and
mindful of the 'ay the 5e's0 an&estors in ,gypt 'ere ensla!ed after a ne' ?haraoh
&ame to the throne$ the priests 'ould ha!e 'orried that one day a ne' ?ersian or
Babylonian king might &ome along 'ho 'ould ensla!e them all o!er again(
"e&ond$ and e!en if that ne!er happened$ the priests 'ould ha!e 'orried that the
longer the 5e's stayed in Babylon$ the likelier they 'ould be to lose their distin&t
national and religious identityB hen&e the priests0 key role in leading the ad!an&e
party of 5e's ba&k to 5erusalem soon after Cyrus ga!e permission in 438 B(C( "o
-od0s 'arning$ 6*ou 'ill die (((6$ referred to the high probability that the 5e'ish
nation 'ould disappear if it stayed in Babylon indefinitely(
'hat do the snake's tem!ting words really mean)
The biggest fools in the Adam and ,!e story 'ere &learly the &ouple themsel!es$
for follo'ing the snake0s ad!i&e and then not &onfessing their sin to -od and
seeking his forgi!eness at the !ery first opportunity( But the snake 'as not all that
bright either( Chat it should ha!e said to ,!e 'as$ 6<ook$ first eat some fruit from
the tree of life to ensure that you 'ill li!e fore!er$ and then eat some fruit from the
tree of the kno'ledge of good and e!il so that you 'ill be&ome equal to -od6(
+nstead the snake simply tells ,!e to ignore -od0s 'arning$ assuring her that she
'ill not die and urging her to opt to be&ome her o'n Fudge of 'hat is right and
'rong( "o the question here is1 Does this make more sense in the &onte%t of a
manifesto for the return to 5erusalemI
The ?ersians0 humiliating defeat in the Battle of :arathon in 730 B(C($ and the
re!olt 'hi&h it triggered in ,gypt in 789 B(C($ 'ill ha!e brought the 5e'ish priests0
&on&erns into sharper than e!er fo&us( ,!eryone must ha!e realiAed that$ under
these &ir&umstan&es$ Babylon 'as hardly the safest pla&e for a large and
prosperous 5e'ish &ommunity( But businessmen al'ays see danger as an
opportunity and most of the 5e'ish e%iles 'ill ha!e been torn bet'een t'o
&hoi&es( Girst$ that of remaining in Babylon and hoping for &ontinued prosperity(
And se&ond$ that of going ba&k to a !ery un&ertain future in 5erusalem(
>a!ing thus far talked mainly about the 5e's 'ho stayed on in Babylon$ + no'
need to say something about the ad!an&e party of 5e's 'hi&h returned to
5erusalem in or soon after 438 B(C( Cyrus0 de&ree permitting this return made no
mention of the need for the Canaanites to hand ba&k the 5e'ish land 'hi&h they
had seiAed in 489 B(C( from its departing o'ners( "o the relati!ely small ad!an&e
party of 5e's found themsel!es farming poor land and being harassed by the
Canaanites at e!ery turn( And all thought of the main body of 5e'ish e%iles in
Babylon returning to 5erusalem any time soon 'as qui&kly 'as put on hold(
:atters impro!ed after Darius &ame to the throne$ although the best land must still
ha!e remained in Canaanite hands( But the -reek !i&tory at :arathon badly dented
Darius0 prestige( And the re!olt in nearby ,gypt 'ill ine!itably ha!e prompted the
Canaanites to resume harassing their un'el&ome ne' neighbours( The only
solution to the 5e'ish predi&ament 'as for all the 5e's in Babylon to return to
5erusalem to use 'eight of numbers to for&e the Canaanites to hand ba&k their
land( But this result 'ould not be a&hie!ed easily or qui&kly and for an initial
period$ perhaps de&ades$ any 5e' returning to 5erusalem 'ould ha!e a !ery
diffi&ult time(
+t follo's therefore that$ e!en 'ith region)'ide &haos seemingly looming in 789
B(C($ it 'as ne!er going to be easy for the 5e'ish priests to persuade e!eryone in
Babylon to return home( +ndeed it seems likely that ha!ing -od &reate Adam from
the dust of the ground 'as intended to en&ourage e!eryone that the return would be
su&&essful1 that -od 'ould if ne&essary &reate more 5e's out of the !ery ground
itself to ensure that his &hosen people 'ould e!entually pre!ail .5ohn the Baptist0s
'ords in :atthe' 313 &ome to mind here1 6-od is able from these stones to raise
up &hildren to Abraham6/( As 'e shall see in a moment$ -od had another plan for
a&hie!ing this as 'ell( ,ither 'ay$ though$ the snake0s 'ords refer to the temptation
fa&ing the 5e'ish businessmen to ignore the priests0 talk of -od0s 'anting his
people to return to 5erusalem and instead to trust their o'n instin&ts and stay in
Babylon for the time being(
'hy does Adam call Eve &flesh of my flesh&)
Adam0s &alling ,!e 6flesh of my flesh6 in -enesis 2123 is so familiar to us that 'e
rarely stop to 'onder 'hat these 'ords really mean( The one thing 'e &an be sure
of$ ho'e!er$ is that the !ery ne%t !erse -enesis 2127 .6Therefore a man lea!es his
father and mother and &lea!es to his 'ife$ and they be&ome flesh6/$ quoted by
5esus in :ark 1019$ 'as a late insertion into the te%t( And in line 'ith the
hypothesis 'e are e%amining here$ 'e must no' ask 'hether it 'as inserted by the
4th &entury B(C( priests 'ho re'rote the Adam and ,!e story( And if so$ then 'hyI

+ shall begin my ans'er by quoting t'o fas&inating Bible passages(
Girst$ ,Ara 311)3 .'ritten by the ,Ara 'ho led the main party of 5e'ish e%iles in
Babylon ba&k to 5erusalem in 748 B(C(/1
After these things had been done$ the offi&ials approa&hed me and
said$ 6The people of +srael and the priests and the <e!ites ha!e not
separated themsel!es from the peoples of the lands 'ith their
abominations$ from the Canaanites$ the >ittites$ the ?eriAAites$ the
5ebusites$ the Ammonites$ the :oabites$ the ,gyptians$ and the
Amorites( Gor they ha!e taken some of their daughters to be 'i!es
for themsel!es and for their sonsB so that the holy ra&e has mi%ed
itself 'ith the peoples of the lands( And in this faithlessness the
hand of the offi&ials and the &hief men has been foremost(6
Chen + heard this$ + rent my garments and my mantle$ and pulled
hair from my head and beard$ and sat appalled(
"e&ond$ 2ehemiah 13123)28 .'ritten by the 2ehemiah 'ho rebuilt 5erusalem0s &ity
'alls in 777 B(C(/1
+n those days + also sa' the 5e's 'ho had married 'omen of
Ashdod$ Ammon and :oabB and half of their &hildren spoke the
language of Ashdod$ and they &ould not speak the language of
5udah$ but the language of ea&h people( And + &ontended 'ith
them and &ursed them and beat some of them and pulled out their
hairB and + made them take oath in the name of -od$ saying$ 6*ou
shall not gi!e your daughters to their sons$ or take their daughters
for your sons or for yoursel!es( Did not "olomon king of +srael sin
on a&&ount of su&h 'omenI Among the many nations there 'as no
king like him$ and he 'as belo!ed by his -od$ and -od made him
king o!er +sraelB ne!ertheless foreign 'omen made e!en him to
sin( "hall 'e then listen to you and do all this great e!il and a&t
trea&herously against our -od by marrying foreign 'omenI6
And one of the sons of 5ehoiada$ the son of ,liashib the high
priest$ 'as the son)in)la' of "anballat the >oroniteB therefore +
&hased him from me(
The dark hilarity of that se&ond passage in parti&ular$ 'ith a top leader &ompletely
6losing his rag6 in publi&$ makes it &lear that this real history( As the saying goes$
6*ou &an0t make this sort of thing up6( And both passages strongly suggest that
Adam0s des&ription of ,!e as 6flesh of my flesh6 'as a 4th &entury B(C( insertion
related to the long)standing problem .referred to in Deuteronomy 911)7/ of 5e'ish
men marrying foreign 'omen and then being persuaded by their 'i!es to 'orship
false gods rather than the one true -od( +f the priests preparing the ground'ork for
the return to 5erusalem 'ere to a!oid a return to the Baals as 'ell then they had to
do e!erything they &ould to get the point a&ross that$ in future$ 5e'ish men should
marry only 5e'ish 'omen(
'hy does God !unish Adam and Eve in the way he does)
That last point also has a bearing on 'hy -od punishes ,!e in the 'ay he does( +
mentioned in Chapter 1; that$ in terms of the story0s being a parable$ -od0s
supposedly greatly multiplying ,!e0s pain in &hildbearing is simply a ba&kdrop to
the real point that$ 'hile it is important that 'e obey -od0s &ommandments$ it is
e!en more important that 'e repent after 'e break them( But there is a further
dimension as 'ell$ linked to the story0s also being a manifesto for the return to
5erusalem(
The key to the su&&ess of the 5e's0 return 'ould be their using 'eight of numbers
to for&e the Canaanites to gi!e ba&k the land seiAed in 489 B(C( And the key to that
'ould be a rapid e%pansion of the 5e'ish nation !ia a sharp in&rease in the
birthrate( "o 'hat greatly multiplied pain in &hildbearing really referred to in the
4th &entury B(C( 'as the need for 5e'ish 'omen to 6greatly multiply6 the number
of &hildren born to them(
Adam0s punishment is also easier to understand 'hen seen in the &onte%t of the
story0s being in part a manifesto for the return to 5erusalem1
Cursed is the ground be&ause of youB in toil you shall eat of it all
the days of your lifeB thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to youB
and you shall eat ((( plants of the field( +n the s'eat of your fa&e
you shall eat bread till you return to the ground$ for out of it you
'ere takenB you are dust$ and to dust you shall return(
Bearing in mind that the Canaanites 'ere still holding on to all the best land$ this
'as e%a&tly the s&enario fa&ing any 5e' 'ho returned to 5erusalem in the early 4th
&entury B(C( "o Adam0s punishment 'as really a &all to 5e'ish men to Foin their
'omen in a de&ade or t'o of sa&rifi&e 'hi&h 'ould allo' their nation e!entually
to re)assert itself(
'hat does the e*!ulsion from the Garden of Eden really mean)
Ginally$ then$ does the idea that the Adam and ,!e story 'as in part a manifesto
shed any ne' light on the meaning of the &ouple0s e%pulsion from the -arden of
,denI
Ce &an be sure$ as + mentioned in Chapter 19$ that the 5e'ish priests 'ould
initially ha!e dra'n a parallel bet'een the e%pulsion from the -arden and the e%ile
to Babylon in 489 B(C(1 painting the e%ile as punishment for the people0s ha!ing
turned a'ay from -od to 'orship the Canaanite Baals( At that time$ of &ourse$ no
one &ould ha!e guessed that Cyrus of ?ersia 'ould &apture Babylon a mere 78
years later and issue a de&ree allo'ing the 5e's to return home(
But by 789 B(C($ 'hen the &ompletion of the return to 5erusalem sooner rather than
later be&ame a burning issue$ it seems almost &ertain that the priests 'ould ha!e
dra'n a different parallel( Ce all kno' about the hanging gardens of Babylon$
built by @ing 2ebu&hadneAAar to please his homesi&k queen$ and 'e &an imagine
that e!eryone sa' them as an attra&ti!e feature of the &ity( "o$ from the perspe&ti!e
of the story as a manifesto$ the e%pulsion of Adam and ,!e from the -arden of
,den no' be&ame a &all to the 5e's still in Babylon to lea!e the hanging gardens
there and return to their real$ -od)gi!en home in 5erusalem(
The case for the story's having been rewritten in "1- $@%@
+ ha!e argued for there being t'o fa&ets to the present Adam and ,!e story1 a
parable and a manifesto( But 'hy do + &laim that it 'as re'ritten in 789 B(C(I <et
me begin by summariAing 'hat + ha!e said so far(
The Adam and ,!e story possibly originated as long as ;$000 years ago( But there
are indi&ations that the story under'ent maFor &hanges later1 almost &ertainly
'hen$ a&&ording to s&holars$ -enesis as a 'hole 'as put into its present form by
5e'ish priests in the 4th &entury B(C(
+n Chapter 1; + identified si% hypotheses as to ho' the story &ame to be 'ritten
and in Chapter 19$ pursuing the si%th and most likely hypothesis$ + argued that
there ha!e in fa&t been t'o !ersions of the story( Girst$ an an&ient herder myth
.'ith 'heat$ intended for the animals$ as the forbidden fruit/ &ondemning the
religious pra&ti&es of early &rop farmers 'ho sa' the snake as a fertility symbol(
And se&ond$ the present !ersion in -enesis 2)3 re'ritten from the myth by the 4th
&entury B(C( priests to remo!e the idea that -od hated &rop farmers and to enable
the story to ser!e both as a parable about repentan&e and as a manifesto urging
5e's e%iled in Babylon sin&e 489 B(C( to return to 5erusalem(
Chere does this lea!e usI Clearly the idea of using a re'ritten Adam and ,!e story
as a manifesto for the return to 5erusalem must ha!e arisen at some point bet'een
438 B(C( .'hen Cyrus of ?ersia ga!e permission for su&h a return/ and 748 B(C(
.'hen the main return a&tually took pla&e/( "o the ne%t thing to do is to narro'
matters do'n to a likely e%a&t date(
The re'riting of the story is unlikely to ha!e taken pla&e at any time bet'een 438
B(C( and 730 B(C( Girst$ an ad!an&e party of 5e's returned to 5erusalem early on in
this period and$ despite many problems$ had been able to rebuild the Temple(
"e&ond$ the early ?ersian rulers and espe&ially Darius + .422)78; B(C(/ 'ere
undisputed masters of the 2ear ,ast during this period and treated the 5e's
relati!ely benignly$ so the problems in 5erusalem and the prosperity no' enFoyed
in Babylon 'ould ha!e seen a 6manifesto6 fall on deaf ears( And third$ most
s&holars agree that -enesis 'as not put into its present form until the 4th &entury
B(C(
But in 730 B(C( Darius sent an army into -ree&e and$ instead of subduing the
-reeks$ it suffered a humiliating defeat at the Battle of :arathon in one of the
great turning points in history( The ?ersians 'ould hardly ha!e publi&iAed this
defeat$ but the ne's e!entually spread and in 789 B(C( prompted ,gypt to re!olt(
This 'as an e!en 'orse setba&k for the ?ersian empire( The Assyrians and
Babylonians had &ome to grief partly through &onquering ,gypt .Fust as 2apoleon
and >itler did through in!ading ussia/( "o 'ith Darius by no' ;3 years old and
unlikely to li!e mu&h longer .he died in 78; B(C(/ a 6perfe&t storm6 &ame together1
e%ternally$ a serious threat to the sur!i!al of the ?ersian empireB and$ internally$ the
risk of a messy su&&ession to the ?ersian throne at the end of Darius0 long reign(
There 'ere thus four things to make 789 B(C( by far the likeliest date for the
5e'ish priests in Babylon to de&ide to use a re'ritten Adam and ,!e story to &all
on their people to prepare sooner rather than later for a mass return to 5erusalem(
Girst$ the priests 'ere marking in that same year the 100th anni!ersary of the start
of their e%ile( "e&ond$ they 'ere at that time engaged in putting -enesis into its
present form( Third$ they may 'ell ha!e dra'n a parallel bet'een the approa&hing
6storm6 and the &ir&umstan&es .'hate!er they may ha!e been/ 'hi&h had seen a
ne' ?haraoh ensla!e the 5e's0 an&estors in ,gypt many &enturies earlier( And
fourth$ the 5e'ish business &ommunity 'ould no' for the first time ha!e been
likely to pay some attention to the &all to return(
The first of t'o questions here is1 Chy$ if the Adam and ,!e story 'as re'ritten
partly as a manifesto in 789 B(C($ did the return to 5erusalem not itself take pla&e in
that same yearI The ans'er is that the return 'ould ha!e taken time to organiAe
and that$ 'ith the smooth a&&ession of Ner%es to the ?ersian throne in 78; B(C($
the 6storm6 soon ble' o!er(
The other question is1 Chy$ gi!en that the mass return to 5erusalem did not take
pla&e until 748 B(C($ do + see it as unlikely that the story 'as re'ritten at a date
later than 789 B(C(I + need to make four points here(
Girst$ a point about the date of 748 B(C( for the return( The date is taken from ,Ara
919 'hi&h says that ,Ara 6'ent up to 5erusalem in the se!enth year of Arta%er%es6$
usually seen as referring to Arta%er%es + .7;4)727 B(C(/( But a problem here is that
the list of ?ersian kings also in&ludes an Arta%er%es ++ .704)343 B(C(/( The E%ford
Bible Commentary 'rites1
Contemporary s&holarship has formed an uneasy &onsensus around
the notion that ,Ara and 2ehemiah had their origin in t'o separate
0memoirs0 from the t'o histori&al figures in c( 7;0)770 BC, (((
The se!enth year of Arta%er%es + 'ould be the traditional date for
,Ara of 748 BC,$ before the date of 2ehemiah0s opening memoirs$
'hi&h 'ould be 77; BC, .there is little debate that 2ehemiah
ser!ed under Arta%er%es +/(
But if it is Arta%er%es ++$ then the maFor alternati!e argument
suggests that ,Ara arri!ed in 5erusalem years after 2ehemiah$ in
338 BC,(
Arguments bet'een these options are not de&isi!e$ but more re&ent
trends ha!e a&&epted that 2ehemiah0s a&tions make more sense
following the pre&edent of ,Ara0s legal reforms$ rather than
pre&eding them( 2ehemiah0s reforms on mi%ed marriage$ for
e%ample$ seem more fo&used than ,Ara0s general a&tions$ and tend
to'ards heightening the se!erity of 2ehemiah0s Fudgement against
lo&al authorities 'ho still did not &omply 'ith 'hat the lo&al
population had already dealt 'ithH Cilliamson .1384/$ too$ notes
that 2ehemiah0s a&tions did not raise the lo&al &ontro!ersies that
,Ara0s a&tions did$ suggesting that by 2ehemiah0s time these 'ere
not generally per&ei!ed as &ontro!ersial a&tions(
JE%ford Bible Commentary$ pp( 303)310K
+ therefore take 748 B(C( as the &orre&t date for the return to 5erusalem$ espe&ially
sin&e no one suggests that 'hen ,Ara refers to 6Darius6$ he &ould possibly mean
Darius ++ rather than Darius +(
"e&ond$ and &oming on to the reasons for seeing the Adam and ,!e story as ha!ing
been re'ritten no later than 789 B(C($ there 'ere no more 6perfe&t storms6 after
that date( Ner%es qui&kly brought ,gypt ba&k to heel( >is attempt to &onquer
-ree&e in 780)793 B(C( 'as unsu&&essful but there 'ere no further maFor e%ternal
threats until Ale%ander the -reat destroyed the ?ersian empire in 330 B(C(
Arta%er%es +0s su&&ession to the throne in 7;4 B(C( was messy$ but he 'as fully in
&ommand by the time the ,gyptians ne%t re!olted$ in 7;0 B(C(
Third$ then$ the only plausible alternati!e timing of the re'riting of the Adam and
,!e story 'ould seem to be the period 7;4)748 B(C(1
7;4 B(C( Ner%es is murdered by Artabanus the >yr&anian(
Ner%es0s son Arta%er%es su&&eeds to the throne$ but the real
po'er is in the hands of Artabanus(
7;7 B(C( Arta%er%es has Artabanus killed and takes full &ontrol of the
?ersian empire( >is reign lasts until 727 B(C(
7;0 B(C( ,gypt re!olts against ?ersian rule(
The -reeks send a large &ontingent to help the ,gyptians
and the re!olt lasts for si% years( But in the end ,gypt is
re&onquered and the -reek &ontingent is destroyed(
748 B(C( ,Ara leads the main party of 5e'ish e%iles in Babylon ba&k
to 5erusalem(
But + 'ould suggest that the situation on this o&&asion 'as the &atalyst for acting
on the manifesto in -enesis 2)3$ rather than for 'riting it( Cith almost thirty years
ha!ing passed sin&e the e!ents of 789 B(C($ the 5e'ish priests 'ill ha!e had time to
make e!eryone familiar 'ith the re'ritten Adam and ,!e story and its underlying
dual message( "o 'hen ,gypt re!olted in 7;0 B(C($ the priests &ould dra' a
parallel 'ith e!ents in 789 B(C($ 'ith Fust enough time to prepare for the return in
748 B(C(
Gourth$ the impression from the Book of ,Ara is that the 5e's had &ontinued to
prosper in Babylon after 789 B(C( and that the return of the main body of 5e's in
748 B(C( 'as primarily the result of Arta%er%es0 issuing a de&ree .,Ara 9/
authoriAing ,Ara to lead the return and to1
&on!ey the sil!er and gold 'hi&h the king and his &ounsellors ha!e
freely offered to the -od of +srael$ 'hose d'elling is in 5erusalem(
This raises the question1 Chy 'as Arta%er%es so 'illing to assist the 5e's to lea!e
BabylonI Ene fa&tor 'as doubtless &le!er persuasion on the part of ,Ara
.&omparable to 2ehemiah0s later persuading Arta%er%es to let him rebuild the
5erusalem &ity 'alls/( But Arta%er%es0 generosity &ould also ha!e had something to
do 'ith an e!ent mentioned in the Book of ,sther( The e!ent in question 'as the
th'arting of a planned massa&re of the 5e's in "usa in 797 B(C($ &elebrated by
5e's e!er sin&e 'ith the Geast of ?urim( The !illain of the pie&e$ >aman the
Agagite$ sent out letters in the name of Ner%es ordering e!ery pro!in&e in the
empire to &arry out the massa&re one month later$ but ,sther persuaded Ner%es to
res&ind the order and e%e&ute >aman instead(
Both the ?urim e!ent and the famous story of 6Daniel in the lion0s den6 in the
Book of Daniel hint strongly at anti)5e'ish feeling in some parts of the ?ersian
empire( "o Arta%er%es0 support for the 5e's0 return to 5erusalem in 748 B(C( may
ha!e stemmed partly from a 'ish to defuse ra&ial tension of this sort( >o'e!er
there is no e!iden&e of serious anti)5e'ish feeling in Babylon up to that point(
+ndeed$ e!en in 748 B(C( not all the 5e's returned home( Babylon &ontinued to
harbour a siAeable 5e'ish population for the ne%t thousand years and e!entually
be&ame one of the t'o great &entres of 5e'ish s&holarship$ produ&ing the
Babylonian Talmud mentioned in Chapter 1;(
A final question possibly in your mind is1 Chy spe&ulate about an e%a&t date for
the re'riting of the Adam and ,!e storyI +s it not enough Fust to say that the
re'riting took pla&e in the first half of the 4th &entury B(C(I
All + &an reply here is that the Adam and ,!e story deals 'ith the se&ond most
important e!ent in all of human history( The Bible$ amplified 'ith 'hat s&ien&e
and s&holarship tell us$ points strongly to 789 B(C( as the likeliest date of the
story0s 'riting( "o there is good reason for seeing this date as 'orth remembering$
and its &entenaries as 'orth &elebrating(
Chapter 16 The Act(a1 Re$ritin3 of the Adam
and Eve Stor
:ost of the best translations of the Bible ha!e been undertaken by &ommittees( The
task of re)organiAing the material in J. E. D and P into the present fi!e books of
the ?entateu&h in the 4th &entury B(C( 'as also doubtless undertaken by a
&ommittee of 5e'ish priests( That said$ ho'e!er$ the 'ork of re'riting the Adam
and ,!e story 'as probably largely the 'ork of one priest$ 'hom + shall for the
rest of this &hapter &all 6the ?riest6( >e 'ould &ertainly ha!e had to follo'
guidelines laid do'n by the &ommittee and he probably had to 'rite a number of
drafts as it &he'ed o!er the ideas he put for'ard ) a&&epting some and reFe&ting
others ) and brought for'ard ideas of its o'n( But the su&&ess of the final !ersion
of the story no' in -enesis 2)3 'as ultimately do'n to him(
The %ommittee's brief to the Priest
The &ommittee0s brief to the ?riest may 'ell ha!e &ome in the form of a &opy of
the original herder !ersion of the story in J .see Chapter 19/$ 'ith 'ording to be
deleted or amended perhaps underlined as follo's1
:ankind started off as hunters$ 'ith the sear&h for food a daily
and dangerous struggle( "o e!entually the <ED taught mankind
to be herders(
Girst$ he taught them ho' to bring 'ater up from under the ground
by digging 'ells(
Then he put ea&h family unit into en&losed gardens 'ith spe&ially)
pro!ided do&ile animals for them to look after(
And finally the <ED planted 'heat in ea&h of the gardens for
these animals to eat and told the herders not to eat it themsel!es$
adding that if they disobeyed him then they 'ould die(
But one parti&ular &ouple$ Adam and his 'ife$ &ould not be
bothered to look after the animals( And a smooth)talking 6snake6
&on!in&ed Adam0s 'ife that she 'ould not die if she ate the 'heat(
"o she gathered some$ &ooked it and shared it 'ith Adam(
+mmediately their eyes 'ere opened to the 6benefits6 of &rop
farming(
"oon after'ards the <ED &ame into the garden$ found the
animals star!ing and be&ame !ery angry( And he punished all the
parties in!ol!ed(
The 6snake6 'as punished by ha!ing its legs &ut off(
The <ED said to Adam$ 6*ou 'ant to be a man of the soil and
eat bread all your lifeI Then be one$ and die one6( And he dro!e
Adam and his 'ife from the garden and &ondemned them to
s&rat&hing a meagre li!ing from the unfriendly soil of land
else'here and to early deaths(
And the <ED further punished Adam0s 'ife by making her suffer
the pain of &hildbirth mu&h more frequently than if she had obeyed
him and been &ontent 'ith life as the 'ife of a herder(
The ?riest 'ould ha!e understood from this that elements of the story 'hi&h had to
be retained in&luded the animals$ forbidden fruit of some sort$ the snake and the
punishments meted out to Adam and his 'ife( And that the key things to remo!e or
amend 'ere the referen&es to 'heat ha!ing been the fruit in question and to -od0s
reason for punishing the &ouple ha!ing been their 'anting to be &rop farmers rather
than herders(
;ewriting the story as a !arable
:y guess is that the ?riest 'ould ha!e preferred to lea!e out the snake$ but that he
kept it for t'o reasons( Girst$ be&ause the &ommittee felt that omitting the snake
'ould rob the story of one of its &entral &hara&ters( And se&ond$ be&ause it allo'ed
him to re'rite the story as a parable(
+ shall in Chapter 20 set out a rather more positi!e !ie' of -od than that held by
many Christians today( :y belief is that this more positi!e !ie' goes right ba&k to
Abraham and so may 'ell ha!e been in the mind of the ?riest( >e$ + suspe&t$ 'ould
ha!e felt that the problem 'ith the original herder myth !ersion of the story 'ent
far beyond its pi&ture of a -od 'ho hates &rop farmers( Gor the ?riest$ the main
problem 'as probably that the story0s pi&ture of -od 'as totally different to the
lo!ing and forgi!ing Gather -od of his o'n personal e%perien&e(
"o re'riting the story as a parable enabled the ?riest to make repentan&e the key
theme of the ne' !ersion$ 'ith -od gi!ing Adam and ,!e at least the one
opportunity to repent and seek his forgi!eness( This took the edge off the harsh
punishments$ 'hi&h no' ser!ed simply to underline the folly of not qui&kly
&onfessing our sins to -od( And re'riting the story as a parable$ and keeping the
talking snake$ meant that no sensible person 'ould e!er see the a&&ount as literally
true(
The &ommittee doubtless queried the ?riest0s de&ision to re'rite the story as a
parable( But he 'ould ha!e quoted the parable in +saiah 411)9 as a pre&edent and
'ould ha!e argued that this 'as the best route to remo!ing all referen&e to 'heat$
to herders and to -od0s hatred of &rop farmers(
A new identity for the forbidden fruit and for Adam and Eve
To get a'ay from the ideas of 'heat as the forbidden fruit and of Adam and his
'ife as rebellious &rop farmers$ the ?riest &learly had to &ome up 'ith some
alternati!es(
Chere the fruit 'as &on&erned$ the ?riest initially &hose grapes$ dra'ing his
thinking here from the 'ay the 2oah and <ot stories end in -enesis 3 and 13
respe&ti!ely 'ith the 6hero6 getting drunk and beha!ing grossly(
Chere Adam and his 'ife 'ere &on&erned$ the ?riest &hose their being the !ery
first man and 'oman on the basis that this 'as the best 'ay to make the story
appear to be a &ontinuation of -enesis 1 'ith its mention of 6man$ male and
female6( But the ?riest probably got the idea of Adam0s being made from the dust
of the ground$ the soil$ from Adam0s name .originally meaning 6man of the soil6 or
&rop farmer/( And 'ith Adam0s 'ife no' the !ery first 'oman$ the ?riest ga!e her
the name ,!e(
+n any e!ent$ the ?riest0s initial suggestion to the &ommittee 'as that the &ouple
'ere put into their garden as young inno&ents and that$ after eating the grapes$ they
got drunk and had their first se%ual en&ounter$ this then opening their eyes to the
fa&t that they 'ere naked(
+t 'ould seem that the &ommittee liked the ne' storyline in general$ but baulked at
the idea of yet more talk of people getting drunk and beha!ing disgustingly( "o
'hile a&&epting Adam and ,!e0s be&oming the !ery first man and 'oman$ they
told the ?riest to &ome up 'ith a better alternati!e for the identity of the forbidden
fruit( And the ?riest0s final &hoi&e 'as the fruit of the 6tree of the kno'ledge of
good and e!il6 'hi&h enabled him to keep the senten&e about the &ouple0s suddenly
be&oming a'are of their nakedness$ thus ensuring that any thinking person in the
future 'ould realiAe that grapes 'ere 'hat he originally had in mind(
A manifesto for the return to (erusalem
+ ha!e suggested that the re'riting of the Adam and ,!e story probably took pla&e
in 789 B(C( "o in the middle of the 'ork on the story$ and Fust 'hen the 5e'ish
priests 'ere preparing to mark the 100th anni!ersary of their e%ile to Babylon$
there suddenly &ame the ne's of ,gypt0s re!olt against ?ersian rule( The 5e's in
5erusalem 'ill qui&kly ha!e sent a letter .similar to the one mentioned in
2ehemiah 1/ saying that the Canaanites had resumed harassing them( And$
ine!itably$ the debate 'ill then ha!e reopened on the question of all the 5e's still
in Babylon returning home(
Gor the ?riest$ this opened up fresh possibilities for his re'riting of the story( >is
ne' !ersion 'ould still ser!e$ for all time$ as a parable about repentan&e( But no'
it &ould also be&ome$ for his o'n generation$ a manifesto urging his fello' e%iles
to return to 5erusalem( And e!en more than that$ a !ehi&le for ensuring that$
follo'ing their arri!al there$ they did not re!ert to the misbeha!iour of their
grandfathers1 marrying Canaanite 'omen and 'orshipping false Canaanite gods(
En that last point$ it 'as at this Fun&ture that the &ommittee inserted the !erses
.-enesis 2123)27/ in 'hi&h Adam des&ribes ,!e as 6flesh of my flesh6( They
doubtless kne' that some of the sons of the priests 'ho had led the ad!an&e party
of 5e's to 5erusalem after 438 B(C( had married Canaanite 'omen( "o there 'as a
problem e!en before the main body of e%iles returned( And the best 'ay to s&ot&h
the problem 'ould be to ha!e a se&ond &lear statement in s&ripture .&orroborating
Deuteronomy 9/ that 5e'ish men 'ere to marry only 6flesh of their flesh6$ 5e'ish
'omen(
Chile itself responsible for the -enesis 2123)27 insertion$ the &ommittee 'ould
ha!e s&rutiniAed &losely the ?riest0s other ideas for introdu&ing a manifesto element
into the re'ritten story( Clearly e!erything$ espe&ially in &onne&tion 'ith the
punishments$ had to make sense both as parable and as manifesto( The last thing
the &ommittee 'anted 'as for the ne' !ersion to be &ompletely misunderstood by
future generations(
Gor both the &ommittee and the ?riest himself$ moreo!er$ persuading their fello'
e%iles to lea!e Babylon 'ith its beautiful hanging gardens and immense
&ommer&ial opportunities 'as not going to be easy( T'o &onfli&ting pi&tures
someho' had to be out a&ross(
Girst$ a re)affirmation that 5erusalem 'as still the promised land$ not Fust of milk
and honey but no' also of silk and money( +f -od0s &hosen people made the trip
sooner rather than later then he 'ould smooth their 'ay and ensure that they on&e
more be&ame the dominant nation( They 'ould 'ear the finest furs .-enesis 3121/$
be blessed 'ith many &hildren .-enesis 311;/ and al'ays ha!e bread on their
tables .-enesis 3119/(
"e&ond$ ho'e!er$ tomorro'0s affluen&e 'ould only &ome after hardship today( The
many &hildren$ needed initially to s'ell the 5e'ish nation and enable it to 'rest
ba&k its best land from the Canaanites$ 'ould &ome at the pri&e of the 5e'ish
'omen suffering birth)pains more often( And the bread on the table 'ould initially
not be easily 'on1 the 5e'ish men 'ould ha!e to start 'ith land bringing forth
thorns and thistles( But there 'ould be hardships if they stayed in Babylon too$ if
the ,gyptian re!olt triggered the &ollapse of the ?ersian empire( And 'ith -od
no' 6telling6 his &hosen people to return home$ did they really 'ant to stay in
Babylon and risk an ensla!ement from 'hi&h -od might ne!er res&ue themI
%hosen Peo!le. Promised <and
Ce should not imagine that the 5e'ish !ie' of themsel!es as -od0s &hosen people
and of their homeland as the promised land 'as simply the typi&al !ie' of people
in the an&ient 'orld( <et me e%plain 'hy(
:any people today are sho&ked by the suggestion in Deuteronomy 911)7 that the
6ethni& &leansing6 during the 13th &entury B(C( in!asion of Canaan$ re&ounted in
the Book of 5oshua$ took pla&e on -od0s orders1
Chen the <ED your -od brings you into the land 'hi&h you are
entering ((( and &lears a'ay many nations before you$ the >ittites$
the -irgashites$ the Amorites$ the Canaanites$ the ?eriAAites$ the
>i!ites$ and the 5ebusites$ se!en nations greater and mightier than
yoursel!es$ and 'hen the <ED your -od gi!es them o!er to you$
and you defeat themB then you must utterly destroy themB you shall
make no &o!enant 'ith themB and sho' no mer&y to them( *ou
shall not make marriages 'ith them$ gi!ing your daughters to their
sons or taking their daughters for your sons( Gor they 'ould turn
a'ay your sons from follo'ing me$ to ser!e other gods(
+ referred to this same passage in Chapter 18$ relating it to Adam0s 6flesh of my
flesh6 'ords in -enesis 2123( Chat 'e ha!e here in both -enesis and
Deuteronomy is insertions by the ?riest0s &ommittee( And e!en if that &ommittee
did not in!ent the ideas of 6&hosen people6 and 6promised land6$ 'e &an be sure
that they sharpened the tone of 'hat the Eld Testament says on the subFe&t as they
undertook the 'ork of using material from J. E. D and P to put the ?entateu&h into
its present form(
"o 'hile the in!asion 'as real enough 'e should not suppose that -od endorsed
.let alone ordered/ the ethni& &leansing$ or e!en that it took pla&e on the s&ale
des&ribed( The priests 'ere gi!ing their nation a 6!ision6 'hi&h 'ould ensure that
6the people 'ould ne!er perish6(
+ndeed$ sin&e then the 5e's ha!e had a remarkable history( The ?eriAAites et&(
mentioned abo!e ha!e all !anished$ not be&ause 5oshua literally 'iped them out$
but be&ause they la&ked the one thing 'ithout 'hi&h nations really do perish1 the
!ision of a true -od( Today0s ,gyptians are &alled ,gyptians be&ause they li!e in
,gypt1 they are a !ery different nation to the ,gyptians of the an&ient 'orld( +n
&ontrast$ today0s 5e's are the same as the 5e's of the 4th &entury B(C( and ha!e
sur!i!ed for the 2$400 years sin&e then be&ause they belie!ed firmly in the one true
-od(
Ef &ourse the 4th &entury B(C( 5e'ish priests had no idea 'hat the long)term
future held for their nation( But they &ould point to three great e!ents o!er the
pre!ious 1$000 years 'hi&h persuaded them that theirs 'as a &hosen people 'ith a
-od)gi!en right to the promised land( And 'hi&h should &on!in&e e!en us that
-od 'as definitely on their side(
Girst$ the ,%odus from ,gypt in the 13th &entury B(C( Ce may question things like
the plagues and the parting of the ed "ea( But on any re&koning$ it really 'as
something of a mira&le that they 6made it6 both out of ,gypt and a&ross the barren
'ilderness to the borders of Canaan(
"e&ond$ the Assyrian failure to &apture 5erusalem in 901 B(C( The northern
kingdom$ +srael$ had been destroyed in 922 B(C( and its people e%iled to Assyria
'here they disappeared from history( The Assyrians planned to infli&t the same fate
on the southern kingdom$ 5udah$ but failed under &ir&umstan&es 'hi&h 'ere again
something of a mira&le(
Third$ the sur!i!al of the 5e'ish nation after the Babylonian king 2ebu&hadneAAar
&aptured 5erusalem in 489 B(C( and e%iled its population to Babylon( Enly -od$
the priests 'ould later think$ &ould ha!e arranged for Cyrus of ?ersia to &apture
Babylon in 433 B(C($ a mere 78 years later$ and gi!e permission for the 5e's to
return home(
+t 'as 'ith all this in mind$ then$ that in 789 B(C( the &ommittee 'ould ha!e
s&rutiniAed the ?riest0s drafts of the re'ritten Adam and ,!e story( And if the
&ommittee 'as di!ided$ then it 'ould probably ha!e been o!er the question of ho'
to present the &apture of 5erusalem in 489 B(C( and ho' to tie this in 'ith -od0s
e%pelling Adam and ,!e from their garden(
Ene party of priests 'ould doubtless ha!e 'anted to emphasiAe the idea that
5erusalem0s fall 'as a matter of -od0s punishing his &hosen people for ha!ing
turned to the Baals$ of -od0s using the Babylonians to bring the 5e'ish nation ba&k
to their senses and ba&k to himself( +n &ontrast$ the other party of priests 'ould
ha!e 'anted the re'riting e%er&ise to &on&entrate on urging all the 5e's in
Babylon to return home(
The ?riest0s great a&hie!ement 'as that his re'riting not only set out a manifesto
'hi&h pleased both parties but also turned a myth about a nasty -od into a parable
about a lo!ing -od 'hose &on&ern is not so mu&h that 'e are too qui&k to sin but
that 'e are too slo' to repent(
'hy did so many of the (ews turn to the $aals !rior to ?1- $@%@)
Ene of the main reasons for re'riting the old Adam and ,!e myth 'as to &orre&t
its mistaken pi&ture of -od and to ensure that the 5e'ish people 'ould ne!er again
turn to the Baals( But 'hy$ 'e may ask$ did so many 5e's .a &hosen people led by
their -od into a promised land/ start 'orshipping the Canaanite Baals in the first
pla&eI
+ suggested in Chapter 19 that Baal 'orship first be&ame a serious problem in the
3th &entury B(C( in the northern kingdom of +srael and had spread to the southern
kingdom of 5udah by the 8th &entury B(C( These dates indi&ate simply that one
fa&tor in the rise of Baal 'orship in +srael 'as that @ing Ahab .897)843 B(C(/
allo'ed his pagan 'ife 5eAebel to build an altar to Baal in the &apital$ and that one
fa&tor in the 6spread6 to 5udah 'as the marriage of their daughter Athalia to @ing
5ehoram of 5udah .878)871 B(C(/( Clearly there 'ere se!eral other fa&tors as 'ell(
Girst$ and Fust as 'ith Ahab and 5ehoram$ those ordinary 5e's 'ho married pagan
'i!es soon &ame under their influen&e and .as mentioned in the e%tra&t from
Deuteronomy 9 abo!e/ started 'orshipping the Baals(
"e&ond$ some 5e'ish men may ha!e been attra&ted to Baal 'orship be&ause of its
grosser aspe&ts$ su&h as &ult prostitution(
Third$ the 5e's0 an&estors had originally been herders but turned to &rop farming
after they &onquered Canaan( They 'ould then ob!iously ha!e be&ome obsessed
'ith the 'eather1 'hen it 'ould rain and ho' hea!ily( Enly -od0s most loyal
ser!ants 'ould ha!e been able to resist$ at times of se!ere drought$ the temptation
to pray to the Canaanite Baals as 'ell(

*et none of this fully e%plains the s&ale of the turn to the Canaanite Baals( "urely
the 5e's 'ould qui&kly ha!e realiAed that praying to the Baals for rain 'as a
&omplete 'aste of time( "o there must ha!e been a further fa&tor as 'ell that had
&aused so many of them to abandon -od(
That further fa&tor is likely to ha!e been that$ as the &enturies passed in the
promised land$ the 5e's had gradually be&ome less and less happy 'ith the an&ient
herder religion 'hi&h they had follo'ed sin&e the time of Abraham( A harsh$
!indi&ti!e -od 'as fine as long as his anger 'as dire&ted against their enemies(
But after the 5e's themsel!es took up &rop farming they &ould no longer a&&ept the
idea$ set out in the J !ersion of the Adam and ,!e story$ that -od still hated &rop
farmers(
:oreo!er$ human nature being 'hat it is$ as herders be&ame a minority group they
&ame to be despised by the maFority &rop farmers( "o the &rop farmers 'ould ha!e
started to question both the old herder religion and 'hat the 5e'ish s&riptures said
about it( And many 'ould ha!e &ome to see the animal sa&rifi&es$ performed on a
fa&tory s&ale in the Temple$ as a grotesque 'ay of 'orshipping -odB a !ie'
refle&ted in >osea ;1;1
+ desire steadfast lo!e and not sa&rifi&e$
the kno'ledge of -od$ rather than burnt offerings(
-radually$ 'e may guess$ more and more 5e's began asking questions similar to
those 'hi&h atheists today ask about the Eld Testament( Cas and is -od really that
nastyI Cere the herders perhaps guilty of ha!ing &reated -od in their o'n imageI
>ad the 'ay they spent their li!es$ on &old lonely hillsides gaAing do'n on the
&rop farmers0 settlements and imagining all the 'i&ked fun those people 'ere
ha!ing$ made the herders a !indi&ti!e lot and therefore their -od harsh and
!indi&ti!e tooI
+t 'ould be 'rong$ furthermore$ to imagine that this kind of doubt ended in 489
B(C( 'hen the e%ile in Babylon began( The 5e'ish priests0 initial message$ painting
the e%ile as di!ine punishment for the people0s ha!ing turned to the Baals$ 'ill
ha!e pri&ked some &ons&ien&es( But most of the 5e's$ ha!ing prayed earnestly to
-od after the siege of 5erusalem began$ 'ill ha!e felt badly let do'n( 2or 'ould
their grand&hildren ha!e been easily persuaded that they had -od to thank for
Cyrus of ?ersia0s &apture of Babylon in 433 B(C( "o$ far from the people ha!ing
rallied around their priests at a time of national &risis$ the gap bet'een priests and
people 'ill ha!e 'idened( And the prosperity 'hi&h the e%iles started to enFoy
after 433 B(C( 'ill ha!e 'idened that gap e!en further(
This then 'as the s&enario fa&ing the 5e'ish priests 'ho in the 4th &entury B(C( set
about &ompiling the -enesis 'hi&h 'e ha!e today( And 'e should re&ogniAe t'o
things( Girst$ that their re'riting of the Adam and ,!e story 'ith its more a&&urate
pi&ture of -od 'ill ha!e played a role both in 'inning ba&k their people and in
preparing the 'ay for the e!entual return to 5erusalem( And se&ond$ that there is an
important lesson here for the Chur&h today( +f it 'ants to 'in ba&k its people$ its
6lost sheep6$ then it too needs to pro!ide them 'ith a more a&&urate pi&ture of -od1
a lo!ing and forgi!ing -od$ not a punishing -od(
PART ,I I9PLICATIONS FOR READIN5
T+E BIBLE
AND 5RASPIN5 T+E C+RISTIAN
9ESSA5E
Chapter !7 A Po"itive Approach to 5od
The traditional !ie' of the Adam and ,!e story as literally true has meant that the
idea of a -od 'ho is a lo!ing Gather 'hen he &an be and a harsh punisher of sins
'hen he has to be is no' entren&hed in mu&h Christian thinking( As :i&hael
-reen puts it in Ad!enture of Gaith1
JThe -od of the Adam and ,!e storyK is a parent 'ho so lo!es his
&hild that anything 'hi&h threatens that &hild0s 'ell)being and
se&urity e!okes strong passions of lo!e and 'rath1 they are$ after
all$ the ob!erse and re!erse of the same thing(
J:i&hael -reen$ Ad!enture of Gaith$ p( 1;;K
:oreo!er$ Christian 'riters like -reen and the author of the e%tra&t from the <+E2
>andbook of Christian Belief in Chapter 4 are in!ariably at pains to stress that the
-od of the 2e' Testament is Fust the same as the -od of the Eld Testament( And
sin&e it goes 'ithout saying that the -od of the Eld Testament regularly punished
people$ 'e are en&ouraged to note ho' 5esus too paints the pi&ture of a -od 'ho
'ill be !enting his 'rath on the faithless and 'i&ked at the time of the se&ond
&oming(
But + obFe&t to this on t'o grounds( Girst$ it does not 6go 'ithout saying6 that the
-od of the Eld Testament regularly punished people( And se&ond$ 5esus0 pi&ture of
-od is$ in my !ie'$ at all times that of a lo!ing Gather -od( "o in this &hapter +
shall look at four key Bible figures$ t'o from ea&h of the Testaments$ to argue that
they all took a far more positi!e approa&h to -od than is generally realiAed(
Abraham
+ begin 'ith Abraham$ about 'hom the Eld Testament tells us fi!e things of
parti&ular interest1
1( Abraham had been brought up 'orshipping the 6household
gods6 mentioned in -enesis 31130)34 and 5oshua 2712(
2( -od0s first &all to Abraham &ame 'hen he 'as 94 years old1
6-o from your &ountry and your kindred and your father0s
house to the land that + 'ill sho' you( And + 'ill make of
you a great nation6 .-enesis 1211)2/(
3( Chen Abraham 'as 33 years old -od made a &o!enant 'ith
him$ promising that he 'ould be 6the father of a multitude
of nations6 and telling him that his 'ife "arah 'ould bear
him a son$ the future +saa& .-enesis 1911)7$1;/(
7( ?rior to the destru&tion of "odom$ Abraham pleaded 'ith
-od not to pro&eed if a &ertain number of righteous people
&ould be found in the &ity( After a lengthy 6negotiation6 on
the ne&essary number$ Abraham finally got -od to agree on
a figure of ten .-enesis 18122)32/(
4( To test Abraham$ -od told him to take +saa& to a distant
mountain and offer him as a burnt offering( The follo'ing
morning Abraham set off 'ith +saa& and$ on arri!al$ piled
some 'ood and tied up +saa& and laid him on top( But as he
took up a knife to kill the boy$ an angel told him to offer
instead 6a ram &aught in a thi&ket by its horns6 .-enesis 22/(
The traditional Christian !ie' is that these passages portray Abraham as a man of
great faith and -od as really ha!ing destroyed "odom and e!eryone in it .apart
from <ot and his daughters/ and really ha!ing tested Abraham o!er the question of
offering +saa&( But there is another 'ay of reading the passages$ one that presents
an e!en more impressi!e pi&ture of Abraham and also a mu&h more positi!e
pi&ture of -od(
Abraham0s family o'ned large herds and flo&ks( "o despite 'orshipping
6household gods6 in his youth$ he 'ill also ha!e &ome to kno' something about
the old herder religion( But its !arious myths .in&luding the original herder !ersion
of the Adam and ,!e story/ 'ill ha!e persuaded him to keep this religion and its
harsh -od at arm0s length(
-od0s speaking to him in -enesis 12 and 19 for&ed Abraham to a&&ept the reality
of the herder -od( *et e!en after that$ Abraham &ontinued to 'restle 'ith the
notion of a harsh punishing -od$ as 'e see in -enesis 18 .the "odom story/ and in
-enesis 22 .the 6testing6 o!er +saa&/(
+n reality$ the destru&tion of "odom 'as a natural disaster$ probably a !ol&ani&
eruption( But the herders sa' the 6fire and brimstone6 raining from the sky as
punishment from their skyLhea!en d'elling -od1 hen&e the herder myth no' in
-enesis 13( Abraham$ hearing the myth mu&h later$ 'ill ha!e struggled 'ith the
idea of a -od 'ho &ould be so &ruel and the 6negotiation6 in -enesis 18 o!er the
number of righteous people needed for -od to stay his hand presents this struggle
in figurati!e terms(
"imilarly$ the -enesis 22 story of Abraham0s &oming &lose to sa&rifi&ing his son
+saa& 'as &ertainly not$ as i&k Carren suggested in Chapter 13$ a test of
Abraham0s faith( ather it marked the point 'here Abraham$ ha!ing earlier reFe&ted
the false gods of his youth$ no' also finally reFe&ted the false pi&ture of -od in the
an&ient herder religion1 'here Abraham turned a'ay from the idea of a -od 'ho
had supposedly punished Adam and ,!e and 'ho allegedly tests people in
outrageous 'ays$ and embra&ed instead the true pi&ture of a lo!ing Gather -od(
:oses
The Book of ,%odus tells us that :oses$ born a >ebre'$ had been adopted by
?haraoh0s daughter and brought up in the pala&e in ,gypt( As a &hild and young
man$ he had doubtless 'orshipped the ,gyptian gods( But he later killed an
oppressi!e ,gyptian offi&ial and fled to :idian 'here he married Uipporah 'hose
father$ 5ethro$ 'as a herder and the lo&al priest of the an&ient herder religion( To
Fudge from 'hat happened later$ it seems that :oses hardly thre' himself into this
ne' religion(
,%odus 3)7 re&ounts :oses0 &on!ersion at the 6burning bush6 and its immediate
aftermath( And it be&omes &lear here that the herder religion of :idian 'as not
e%a&tly the same as the religion of the >ebre's in ,gypt( "urprisingly$ it did not
in!ol!e &ir&um&ision1 hen&e Uipporah0s &omplaint about :oses being a
6bridegroom of blood6 .,%odus 7124)2;/( And :oses did not kno' -od0s >ebre'
name1 *>C> .,%odus 3117/(
:oses 'as plainly stunned by the task 'hi&h -od ga!e him1 to persuade the
?haraoh to release the >ebre's from ensla!ement in ,gypt( After all$ he kne' that$
in ,gypt$ the >ebre's 'ere far from all being faithful to the -od of Abraham1 the
fa&t that he had had to break up a fight bet'een t'o >ebre's .,%odus 2113/
sho'ed that lo!e for one0s neighbour 'as in short supply( As suggested by the later
6golden &alf6 in&ident$ some of the >ebre's in ,gypt must ha!e returned to the
6household gods6 'hom Abraham had reFe&ted( And many of those still
'orshipping the -od of Abraham 'ill ha!e seen the hand of that -od in their
ensla!ement and 'ill ha!e re!erted to the an&ient pi&ture of him as a harsh
punishing -od(
+n his first 'eeks ba&k in ,gypt$ :oses too probably sa' *>C> as a punishing
-od$ espe&ially sin&e there must be some truth to the a&&ount in ,%odus 9)12 of
ho' ?haraoh 'as e!entually for&ed to let the >ebre's lea!e ,gypt( But 'hen
e!eryone 'as safely in "inai and he sa' ho' -od met their needs$ :oses must
ha!e started to rethink matters( And the mild Ten Commandments 'hi&h -od
issued at "inai must parti&ularly ha!e opened :oses0 eyes to the fa&t that -od0s
rules are intended for the benefit of mankind$ rather than being some ne' form of
ensla!ement(
"o 'e need$ + suggest$ a mu&h more positi!e !ie' of -od than the one most
Christians dra' from the a&&ount of -od0s 6punishing6 his people during the
6'andering in the 'ilderness6( Gor all the talk of 6'andering6$ the reality is that
the people spent &lose to 70 years in 6refugee &amps6 on the edge of the
'ilderness$ unable to gain a foothold in the promised land( This stalemate$ and the
outbreaks of disease and the natural disasters 'hi&h ine!itably o&&ur o!er so long a
period$ had to be e%plained someho'( "o to keep his people fo&used$ :oses
painted all this as the result of the nation ha!ing sinned both o!er the 6golden &alf6
.,%odus 32/ and by their &onstant 6murmurings6 .2umbers 17)1;/(
But the real message e!en here 'as not about a punishing -od( ather$ t'o points
'ere being made( Girst$ that -od ne!er punishes anyone but$ if the o&&asion
demands it$ may temporarily remo!e his prote&ti!e hand .Fust as the 5e'ish priests
at the time of the start of the e%ile in Babylon &laimed that -od had 6allo'ed6 the
Babylonians to &apture 5erusalem be&ause the nation had turned from the true -od
to false gods/( And se&ond$ that if -od &ould be so insistent upon the loyalty of his
o'n people$ they &ould &ertainly trust him to help them defeat their enemies(
(esus
Both Abraham and :oses e!entually be&ame &lear in their o'n minds that -od is
a lo!ing Gather -od( But for a fully positi!e statement of the true nature of -od$
the 'orld had to 'ait for the &oming of 5esus(
+ mentioned in Chapter 4 that 5esus dismissed all idea that -od punishes sins in
this life and that his Ci&ked Tenants parable in :ark 12 makes it &lear that -od
instead makes repeated efforts to urge sinners to repent( But + 'ant no' to go e!en
further than this( + shall argue belo' that the e%&lusion of the finally unrepentant
from hea!en 'ill not be a matter of punishing them( And also that 5esus0 se&ond
&oming 'ill not be a &ase of -od0s !enting his anger on the 'i&ked and faithless
ali!e at that time(
To begin 'ith$ ho'e!er$ + need to &larify 5esus0 'ords in 5ohn 41171
"in no more$ that nothing 'orse befall you(
The &onte%t here is 5esus0 healing a paralyti& and telling him to 6take up his pallet
and 'alk6( This gets the man into trouble 'ith the authorities 'ho a&&use him of
6breaking the sabbath6( "o 'hen 5esus meets him again later$ the first thought in
the man0s mind is to betray 5esus to them( 5esus senses this and 'arns the man of
the &onsequen&es1 not that -od 'ill punish the man either in this life or the ne%t$
but that su&h disloyalty and ingratitude 'ill ruin his faith and that .unless he later
repents$ 'hi&h seems improbable/ he 'ill forfeit all hope of one day entering
hea!en(
>a!ing said that$ + &ome no' to the question of 'hether e%&lusion from hea!en
'ill be a matter of punishment( :ost Christians think that 5esus portrayed hell as
punishment$ apparently be&ause many of 5esus0 parables talk about angry kings and
masters imprisoning$ beating and e!en killing their ser!ants( "o let me make four
points here(
Girst$ parables must be treated as parables( And the point of most of 5esus0 parables
is to stress that there are things 'e must do in this life if 'e hope to enter hea!en
after 'e die( Things like belie!ing$ repenting and learning to lo!e$ trust and obey
-od(
"e&ond$ 5esus points in some of his parables .su&h as that of the =nforgi!ing
"er!ant$ :atthe' 18123)37/ to a dual parallel bet'een hell and prison( Both ser!e
on the one hand as deterrents to e!il)doing and on the other hand as a means of
separating .and prote&ting/ the obedient from the disobedient$ the good from the
bad .:atthe' 24131)7;/( "imilarly$ in the parable of the Ceeds in :atthe' 13127)
30 5esus0 key point is that Fust as 'eeds 6&hoke6 the 'heat .:atthe' 1319/ so too$
in this life$ 'i&ked people 6&hoke6 ) and lead astray .:atthe' 181;)9/ ) some
Christians( But in the life to &ome this 'ill be pre!ented by -od0s denying pla&es
in hea!en to those 'ho$ by their refusal to repent$ ha!e sho'n that they are
6'eeds6 and 'ill ne!er &hange their 'i&ked 'ays(
Third$ 5esus stresses the need to obey the &ommandment that 'e lo!e our
neighbour .:atthe' 22133/( "o it is to be e%pe&ted that -od 'ill e%&lude from
hea!en those 'ho ) Fudged from their past re&ord and their failure to repent ) are
&ertain to go on mistreating people in the ne%t life$ if gi!en the &han&e to do so(
And 5esus gi!es an e%ample of this in the parable in <uke 1;113)31 'here$ e!en
after death$ the ri&h man still 'ants <aAarus to run around at his be&k and &all(
Gourth$ 'e must not misunderstand those parables 'hi&h talk about people being
beaten or killed by kings and masters( Ce do not &on&lude from the master0s praise
of the dishonest ste'ard in the parable in <uke 1;11)3 that -od applauds those
'ho 6&ook the books6( "imilarly 'e should not &on&lude that these parables are
talking about a harsh punishing -od( ather$ 5esus0 point is that Fust be&ause -od
.unlike earthly kings and masters/ is lo!ing and forgi!ing$ this does not mean that
he 'ill a&&ept into hea!en those 'ho ignore him &ompletely(
+n sum$ then$ the message from 5esus0 parables of this sort is that -od 'ill e%&lude
the unrepentant from hea!en$ not to punish them$ but solely to pre!ent them from
spoiling hea!en for e!eryone else(
Ce &ome finally$ then$ to the question of 'hether 5esus portrayed his se&ond
&oming as a time 'hen -od 'ould !ent his anger on the 'i&ked( Certainly 5esus
had a lot to say about the end of the age$ 'hen the 6"on of man6 'ould &ome to
usher in the day of Fudgment( Gor e%ample$ he e%plains his parable of the Ceeds in
:atthe' 13127)30 as follo's1
At the &lose of the age$ the "on of man 'ill send his angels$ and
they 'ill gather out of his kingdom all &auses of sin and all
e!ildoers$ and thro' them into the furna&e of fireB there men 'ill
'eep and gnash their teeth .:atthe' 13171)72/(
<ike'ise :ark 13 .and :atthe' 27L<uke 21/ inter'ea!es an a&&ount of 5esus0
return 'ith a prophe&y about a 5e'ish re!olt against oman rule1
+n those days there 'ill be su&h tribulation as has not been from
the beginning of the &reation 'hi&h -od &reated until no' and
ne!er 'ill be( And if the <ord had not shortened the days$ no
human being 'ould be sa!edB but for the sake of the ele&t$ 'hom
he &hose$ he shortened the days (((
+n those days$ after that tribulation$ the sun 'ill be darkened$ and
the moon 'ill not gi!e its light$ and the stars 'ill be falling from
hea!en$ and the po'ers in the hea!ens 'ill be shaken( And then
they 'ill see the "on of man &oming in &louds 'ith great po'er
and glory( And then he 'ill send out the angels and gather his ele&t
from the four 'inds(
And 5esus0 6sheep and goats6 a&&ount in :atthe' 24131)7; reads1
Chen the "on of man &omes in his glory$ and all the angels 'ith
him$ then he 'ill sit on his glorious throne( Before him 'ill be
gathered all the nations$ and he 'ill separate them one from
another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats$ and he
'ill pla&e the sheep at his right hand$ but the goats at the left(
Then the @ing 'ill say to those at his right hand$ 0Come$ E blessed
of my Gather$ inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the
foundation of the 'orld0 (((
Then he 'ill say to those at his left hand$ 0Depart from me$ you
&ursed$ into the eternal fire prepared for the de!il and his angels0 (((
And they 'ill go a'ay into eternal punishment$ but the righteous
into eternal life(
+t 'ould be easy to see all of this as e!iden&e that -od really 'ill be pouring out
his 'rath at the time of 5esus0 se&ond &oming( But three important points need to
be made here(
Girst$ 'hat 'e ha!e in all these passages is a mi% of prophe&y and parable( "o the
mention of 6the @ing6 and of 6eternal punishment6 in :atthe' 24 takes us ba&k to
'hat + said abo!e &on&erning 5esus0 parables about kings and masters punishing
their ser!ants(
"e&ond$ 5esus himself ne!er mentioned 6the 'rath of -od6( This term appears only
t'i&e in the -ospels1 :atthe' 319L<uke 319 .from the lips of 5ohn the Baptist/ and
5ohn 313; .'hi&h the E%ford Bible Commentary suggests is most likely editorial
&omment by the author of 5ohn/( The future 6!engean&e6 and 6'rath6 referred to in
<uke 21122)23 'ould be *oman !engean&e and 'rath$ follo'ing the 5e'ish re!olt
in ;; A(D(
Third$ 5esus made the poignant statement in <uke 181181
Chen the "on of man &omes$ 'ill he find faith on earthI
This &ontradi&ts the suggestion in :atthe' 27117 that 5esus 'ill return 6'hen the
good ne's of the kingdom has been pro&laimed throughout the 'hole 'orld6(
+nstead$ it seems to imply that 5esus 'ill return at a time not of his o'n &hoosing$
and not e!en of -od0s &hoosing( And this$ together 'ith <uke 3141)4; .'here 5esus
rebukes 5ames and 5ohn for suggesting that they 6bid fire &ome do'n from
hea!en6 to punish a "amaritan !illage 'hi&h had refused to re&ei!e him/$ hints at a
far better e%planation for 5esus0 se&ond &oming( 2amely that 'ith the human ra&e
fa&ing e%tin&tion at some point in the future$ 'hether be&ause of a natural disaster
or a nu&lear 'ar$ 5esus 'ill return to end the mayhem(
+n &on&lusion$ then$ + see 5esus as ha!ing &onsistently portrayed -od as e%&lusi!ely
a lo!ing Gather -od( >e does not punish people in this life$ he 'ill not be !enting
his 'rath at the time of 5esus0 se&ond &oming$ and he 'ill not be 6punishing6 those
'hom he e!entually e%&ludes from hea!en( But it 'ould be 'rong to see this as in
any 'ay do'nplaying the importan&e both of our de&iding to do e!erything
possible to be &hosen for a pla&e in hea!en and of our making that de&ision as soon
as possible(
5esus o&&asionally spoke of hell .figurati!ely$ see Chapter 19/ as a 6furna&e of
fire6( But his usual pi&ture of hell 'as the equally dreadful one of a pla&e of 6outer
darkness6 ) a !ery pri!ate hell of total loneliness ) 'here people 6'ill 'eep and
gnash their teeth6 .more on this in Chapter 22/( ,ither 'ay$ the de&ision to aim for
hea!en is a !ital one(
And 5esus urged e!eryone to make this de&ision 'ithout delay( 2ot be&ause he
e%pe&ted to return any time soon after his death$ but be&ause ea&h of us needs to
get our li!es straight 'ith -od before our death( Belie!ing$ repenting and learning
to lo!e$ trust and obey -od are things 'e &an do only in this lifetime( And many of
us are already$ kno'ingly or not$ approa&hing 6the night our soul is required of us6
.<uke 12120/(
Paul
+ mentioned abo!e that 5esus himself ne!er referred to the 6'rath of -od6( But
many in the early Chur&h &learly belie!ed that -od punishes sinful people in this
life$ as seen for e%ample in A&ts 4$ 12 and 13(
+t is therefore surprising that ?aul ne!er on&e suggested that -od punishes people
in this life$ not e!en in omans 1118)32 'here he 'rites1
Gor the 'rath of -od is re!ealed from hea!en against all
ungodliness and 'i&kedness of men ((( Claiming to be 'ise$ they
be&ame fools$ and e%&hanged the glory of the immortal -od for
images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles (((
Gor this reason -od ga!e them up to dishonourable passions( Their
'omen e%&hanged natural relations for unnatural$ and the men
like'ise ga!e up natural relations 'ith 'omen and 'ere &onsumed
'ith passion for one another$ men &ommitting shameless a&ts 'ith
men and re&ei!ing in their o'n persons the due penalty(
Ce need to be &lear here that ?aul is not suggesting that the 6penalty6$ presumably
disease$ 'as one infli&ted by -od as a form of punishment(
:oreo!er$ and 'hereas >ebre's 121; says that -od 6dis&iplines and &hastises
e!eryone 'hom he lo!es6$ ?aul says in 1 Corinthians 111321
Chen 'e are Fudged by the <ord 'e are &hastened so that 'e may
not be &ondemned along 'ith the 'orld(
'hi&h refers simply to -od0s pri&king the &ons&ien&es of Christians 'ho sin so as
to en&ourage them to repent and seek his forgi!eness(
Ginally$ and 'hile ?aul did say that 5esus0 se&ond &oming 'as imminent and 'ould
be a time 'hen -od 'ould pour out his 'rath$ there are three reasons 'hy he had
no &hoi&e in this matter( Girst$ be&ause he genuinely belie!ed that 5esus0 return was
imminent( "e&ond be&ause$ 'ith many 5e's li!ing outside ?alestine ha!ing Foined
his 6-entile6 &hur&hes .and in line 'ith 1 Corinthians 31201 6To the 5e's$ + be&ame
as a 5e'$ in order to 'in 5e's6/$ he had no option but to 'rite to these &hur&hes in
familiar 6punishing -od6 terms( And third$ be&ause he felt it 'ould help him to
'in belie!ers and to dis&ourage sinful beha!iour among ne' &on!erts(

Chapter !1 A Po"itive Approach to the
Bi)1e
:y &laim in this book is that the Adam and ,!e story in -enesis 2)3 'as re'ritten
in 789 B(C($ from an an&ient herder myth about -od punishing the first &rop
farmers$ and that it should be read today as a parable about repentan&e( But + ha!e
also said that$ regardless of 'hen it 'as 'ritten or 'ho 'rote it$ the story definitely
&arries the signature of -od( "o 'hy is it important to date it ) and read it ) in the
'ay that + ha!e suggestedI :y ans'er to this question is in t'o parts(
Girst$ there are t'o sets of people 'ho 'ould parti&ularly benefit from learning that
the story is a parable and that it 'as 'ritten in its present form in the 4th &entury
B(C( Gor many Christians$ the story0s apparent pi&ture of a harsh -od hampers both
their o'n trust in him and their ability to share their faith 'ith others( And for most
non)&hur&hgoers$ the idea that the present story dates ba&k to the da'n of time$
plus its mention of a talking snake and Adam0s rib$ do'ngrades it to myth status(
"e&ond$ and more generally$ the message people take from the Adam and ,!e story
ine!itably &olours the 'ay they then read the rest of the Bible(
Taking up that last point$ 'e shall in this &hapter look at t'o slightly different
Christian approa&hes to the Bible( Girst$ the approa&h taken by e!angeli&al
Christians( And se&ond$ a &omplementary Christian approa&h to the Bible 'hi&h
many people 'ill .+ hope/ find both positi!e and helpful( But + 'ant to begin by
&onsidering ho' the ?riest of Chapter 13 ) and the &ommittee of 'hi&h he 'as a
member ) 'ould ha!e !ie'ed the s&riptures a!ailable to them(
The Priest's a!!roach to the scri!tures available to him
The first point to make here is that the 5e'ish s&riptures of the early 4th &entury
B(C( did not in&lude the 2e' Testament and 'ere also !ery different to 'hat 'e
no' ha!e in The Eld Testament( Chen the &ommittee started 'ork$ all they had
'ere the four do&uments J$ E$ D and P$ together 'ith the Book of ?salms$ some
histori&al books .su&h as 5oshua$ 5udges$ 1$2 "amuel and 1$2 @ings/ and some
propheti& books .in&luding Amos$ >osea$ :i&ah$ 5eremiah and &hapters 1)47 of
+saiah/(
Also$ 'e should not assume that$ Fust be&ause they had J$ E$ D and P in front of
them$ the ?riest and the &ommittee 'ere better pla&ed than oursel!es to Fudge
matters( All they kne' 'as that P 'as the ne'est of the four do&uments and that D
had been dis&o!ered in ;22 B(C( during reno!ations in the Temple( They had no
idea 'hen or 'here J 'ith its herder myth !ersion of the Adam and ,!e story had
been 'ritten$ or 'ho 'rote it( And they &ertainly had none of the insights 'hi&h
s&ien&e has brought us today( "o they 'ere Fust as mu&h in the dark as oursel!es(
,!en more important$ the ?riest and the &ommittee did not ha!e the full Book of
Daniel$ &hapters 9)12 of 'hi&h 'ere not 'ritten .a&&ording to the E%ford Bible
Commentary/ until the 2nd &entury B(C( "o they 'ere una'are both of Daniel 9113
.'hi&h talks about the triumphant &oming of 6one like a son of man6$ taken by
Christians as a referen&e to 5esus0 return at the start of the &onsummation/ and of
Daniel 1212 .'hi&h talks$ for the first time in our present Bible$ about a
resurre&tion of the dead/(
A&&ordingly$ and in terms of 5ohn "tott0s frame'ork to 'hi&h 'e 'ill &ome in a
moment$ the ?riest and his &ommittee had the a&&ounts of Creation$ in P$ and of
the Gall .or$ at any rate$ the herder myth !ersion of the Adam and ,!e story/ in J
and details of the initial phases of the edemption .the &o!enants made 'ith
Abraham and :oses and a fe' :essiah prophe&ies/( But they had no &lear
information about the final and &ru&ial phase of the edemption or about the
Consummation( And three further quite important points need to be made here(
Girst$ the ?riest and the &ommittee 'ill ha!e been fully a'are of ho' the Creation
a&&ount in P had been 'ritten in the ;th &entury B(C( They 'ill ha!e kno'n that its
primary purpose had been to &ombat the ridi&ulous Babylonian myths 'hi&h the
5e's &ome a&ross after arri!ing in Babylon in 489 B(C( And they 'ill ha!e kno'n
that the priests in!ol!ed had fasted and prayed at length during the se!eral days
taken to 'rite it( "o 'hile they 'ere sure that the a&&ount 'as e%a&tly as -od had
'anted it 'ritten$ they probably kne' that it 'as not ne&essarily literally true(
"e&ond$ the ?riest and the &ommittee 'ould ne!er ha!e en!isaged that the &oming
:essiah 'ould be the "on of -od( Certainly he 'ould be 6a man sent from -od6
.as 5ohn the Baptist is des&ribed in 5ohn 11;/$ but his purpose 'ould be to re)
establish the kingdom of 5udah destroyed by the Babylonians and to restore the
Temple in 5erusalem as the fo&us of 'orship of the one true -od1 not physi&ally .it
had been rebuilt by 41; B(C(/ but in terms of 'hat 'as in people0s hearts( This
:essiah 'ould ha!e to suffer .+saiah 43/ Fust as the 5e's in the ad!an&e party sent
to 5erusalem after 438 B(C( had suffered( But in the same 'ay that -od 'ould
ensure that 'hen the main party of 5e's still in Babylon returned home they 'ould
ultimately re&laim all their land from the Canaanites$ so too -od 'ould ensure that
the :essiah 'ould e!entually su&&eed in restoring full independen&e for his
&hosen people in their promised land(
Third$ the ?riest and the &ommittee 'ill ha!e kno'n that their s&riptures in&luded
many things 'hi&h 'ere literally true$ some things 'hi&h 'ere parables .+saiah
411)9 and 2 "amuel 1211)7/$ some myths .the Cain and Abel story and 2oah Glood
story/$ some manifestos .the talk of 6&hosen people6 and 6promised land6 and the
prophe&ies about -od0s destroying the 5e's0 enemies and sending the :essiah/ and
a 'hole raft of legal and religious rules( And although mu&h of this 'as of
un&ertain date and origin$ they 'ere &on!in&ed that all of it &arried -od0s signature(
(ohn Stott's creationAfallAredem!tionAconsummation framework
+n setting out the e!angeli&al approa&h to the Bible$ 5ohn "tott speaks in +ssues
Ga&ing Christians Today of its ha!ing a 6fourfold frame'ork61
1( Creatio1
+t is absolutely foundational to the Christian faith ((( that in
the beginning$ 'hen time began$ -od made the uni!erse out
of nothing ((( Ginally$ as the &lima% of his &reati!e a&ti!ity$
he made man$ male and female$ in his o'n image(
2( !all1
They listened to "atan0s lies$ instead of -od0s truth( +n
&onsequen&e of their disobedien&e they 'ere dri!en out of
the garden ((( All our human alienation$ disorientation and
sense of meaninglessness stem ultimately from this (((
6Eriginal sin6 means that our inherited human nature is no'
t'isted 'ith disastrous self)&entredness(
3( "e#e$%tio1
+nstead of abandoning or destroying his rebellious &reatures$
as they deser!ed$ -od planned to redeem them( 2o sooner
had they sinned than -od promised that the 'oman0s seed
'ould &rush the serpent0s head .-enesis 3114/$ 'hi&h 'e
re&ogniAe as the first predi&tion of the &oming "a!iour(
-od0s redempti!e purpose began to take &learer shape 'hen
he &alled Abraham and entered into a solemn &o!enant 'ith
him$ promising to bless both him and through his posterity
all the families of the earth ) another promise 'e kno' has
been fulfilled in Christ and his 'orld'ide &ommunity(
-od rene'ed his &o!enant$ this time 'ith +srael$ at :ount
"inai$ and kept promising through the prophets that there
'as more$ mu&h more$ to &ome in the days of the messiani&
kingdom(
Then in the fullness of time the :essiah &ame ((( 2o' today$
through the death$ resurre&tion and "pirit)gift of 5esus$ -od
is fulfilling his promise of redemption and is remaking
marred humankind$ sa!ing indi!iduals and in&orporating
them into his ne'$ re&on&iled &ommunity(
7( Co&'$$atio1
Ene day$ 'hen the good ne's of the kingdom has been
pro&laimed throughout the 'hole 'orld .:atthe' 27117/$
5esus Christ 'ill appear in great magnifi&en&e( >e 'ill raise
the dead$ Fudge the 'orld$ regenerate the uni!erse
and bring -od0s kingdom to its perfe&tion( Grom it all pain$
de&ay$ sin$ sorro' and death 'ill be banished$ and in it -od
'ill be glorified for e!er( :ean'hile$ 'e are li!ing in
bet'een times$ bet'een kingdom &ome and kingdom
&oming$ bet'een the 6no'6 and the 6then6 of redemption$
bet'een the 6already6 and the 6not yet6(
J5ohn "tott$ +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ pp( ;2);3K

"o the 6fall6 has be&ome here one of the four &ornerstones of the Bible message
rather than Fust a one)off story like the Cain and Abel$ 2oah Glood and "odom and
-omorrah episodes( And as noted in Chapter 20$ the idea of a -od 'ho is by turns
lo!ing and punishing has$ be&ause of this$ no' be&ome &entral in a great deal of
Christian thinking(
,!angeli&al Christians treat the Bible as 6infallible6 'ith :i&hael -reen e%plaining
that this is not quite the same thing as stri&t literal truth .see Chapter 17/( But most
e!angeli&als 'ill Fustify the 6infallibility6 of the &reation and fall elements of the
frame'ork by quoting :atthe' 4118 .6not an iota$ not a dot$ 'ill pass from the la'
until all is a&&omplished6/$ a suggestion 'hi&h + questioned in Chapter 4( And 5ohn
"tott0s frame'ork &ertainly treats the Adam and ,!e story as if literally true(
A !ositive %hristian a!!roach to the $ible
+ no' present 'hat + see as a rather more positi!e approa&h to reading the Bible(
But let me stress that this is a &omplementary approa&h to "tott0s( + ha!e retained
his fourfold frame'ork 'hile trying to bring its detail more into line 'ith the
thinking behind the re'riting of the Adam and ,!e story in the 4th &entury B(C($
'ith 'hat s&ien&e no' tells us and 'ith the positi!e approa&h to -od 'hi&h + set
out in Chapter 20(
A&&ordingly$ and in terms of the Bible as a 'hole$ + ha!e dra'n up the follo'ing
table$ 'ith 5ohn "tott0s four themes in the left hand &olumn and 'hat + see as
positi!e inferen&es .or messages/ in the right hand &olumn1
Theme ."tott/ 6nferenceAmessage
1( %reation Ce are here be&ause -od has put us here( "o 'e
should honour -od and respe&t .and be &on&erned for
the 'elfare of/ e!eryone else on the planet$ all of
'hom are .like us/ made in the image of -od(
2( Ball Be&ause -od is a lo!ing -od$ he laid do'n rules of
&ondu&t framed to ser!e mankind0s best interests(
"adly$ mankind qui&kly began breaking -od0s rules(
But be&ause -od is also a forgi!ing -od$ he pri&ks
the &ons&ien&es of those 'ho break his rules$ hoping
in this 'ay to en&ourage them to repent( Goolishly$
though$ 'e often ignore his promptings(
3( ;edem!tion Grom the time of the !ery first sin$ -od formulated a
plan to 6redeem6 fallen mankind$ to bring them ba&k
into a proper$ lo!ing relationship 'ith himself(
a( Co!enant 'ith +n the first step of this plan$ -od rea&hed out to
Abraham Abraham 'ith the message of a 6&hosen people6 and
a 6promised land6(
b( Co!enant 'ith After his people be&ame ensla!ed in ,gypt$ -od0s
:oses ne%t step 'as to res&ue them from there and to
prepare them for a return to the promised land( >e
rea&hed out to :oses and$ on&e his people 'ere
safely in "inai$ established a fresh &o!enant$ in&luding
the Ten Commandments(
&( :essiah -od0s people &onquered the promised land and later$
prophe&ies under Da!id and "olomon$ the kingdom be&ame
ri&h and po'erful( But after that the kingdom split in t'o
and the Assyrians finally destroyed the northern half
in 922 B(C(
This left Fust a small 5e'ish kingdom in the south$
5udah$ 'ith its days seemingly numbered( And 'ith
many 5e's no' ha!ing turned a'ay from -od to
'orship false gods$ -od 'as fa&ed 'ith the diffi&ult
de&ision of 'hat to do about matters(
Ef &ourse -od had no intention of breaking his
&o!enants 'ith Abraham and :oses1 he 'ould ne!er
let the 5e's be 'iped off the fa&e of the earth( But
ho' &ould he get his people to see that the thing they
needed to do 'as$ not to play their enemies off against
one another$ but rather to abandon the false gods and
to trust him to preser!e the nation$ regardless of 'hat
might happen to the &ingdomI
-od0s only option 'as to inspire the 5e'ish prophets
to deli!er a t'ofold message1
.i/ +f the people did not repent and return to him$
he 'ould destroy their kingdom .the !ineyard
of +saiah 411)9/ and the &urrent generation
'ould ha!e to suffer the &onsequen&esB and
.ii/ +f that happened$ he 'ould ne!ertheless rene'
his &o!enant 'ith all future generations and
'ould e!entually send a :essiah to 6restore the
kingdom6$ a 'onderful time 'hen 6the eyes of
the blind shall be opened$ and the ears of the
deaf unstopped6 .+saiah 3414/(
-od 'as in fa&t more sad than angry about the 'ay
his people had let him do'n( But he ga!e his
signature to 'hat the prophets 'rote$ e!en to the idea
that he intended to use the Assyrians or Babylonians
to destroy the kingdom$ be&ause he kne' that he
needed to send out a tough message(
After the Babylonians did indeed destroy the
kingdom$ in 489 B(C($ and &arried off the entire
population of 5erusalem into e%ile in Babylon$ -od
needed to send out a re!ised message1
.i/ >e 'ould e!entually destroy all his people0s
enemiesB and
.ii/ The :essiah 'ould &ome as a humble king
.Ue&hariah 313/ and a suffering ser!ant .+saiah
43/$ the latter passage 'ritten by a different
man to the author of +saiah 4 and 34 abo!e(
d( 433)7 B(C( -od 'as &ertainly qui&k to 6destroy the Babylonians6(
And to Fudge from ,Ara 1$ Cyrus of ?ersia0s &apture
of Babylon in 433 B(C( seemed to mark him out as a
quasi):essiah( ,spe&ially sin&e$ under ?ersian rule$
the 5e's in Babylon 'ere permitted to return home
and to enFoy a fair measure of autonomy(
Ale%ander the -reat0s destru&tion of the ?ersian
empire in 330 B(C( did not alter this( But things
&hanged for the 'orse after 138 B(C( 'hen the 5e's
&ame under "eleu&id rule and espe&ially after
Antio&hus +# &ame to throne and in 1;8 B(C( began
perse&uting the 5e's( This triggered a re!olt and the
emergen&e of another seeming quasi):essiah$ 5udas
:a&&abee$ 'ho established a semi)independent
5e'ish state in 1;4 B(C(
>o'e!er in ;3 B(C( ?ompey destroyed the "eleu&id
empire and 5udea be&ame a oman prote&torate(
"o the 5e's began on&e again looking for'ard to the
&oming of their :essiah(
e( 5esus Chen 5esus began his ministry$ the 5e's had three
pi&tures of the :essiah that -od 'ould send to them1
.i/ A :essiah 'ho 'ould &ome to end oman rule
and establish an independent 5e'ish kingdomB
.ii/ A :essiah 'ho 'ould &ome to punish the
faithless1 the !ie' refle&ted in the 'ords of
5ohn the Baptist in :atthe' 319)12B and
.iii/ A :essiah 'ho 'ould &ome to bless the
faithful1 the !ie' set out in +saiah 34 and ;1$
albeit along 'ith mention of -od0s !engean&e(
>o'e!er 5esus made it &lear that he 'as neither the
first nor the se&ond type of :essiah1
.i/ >e emphasiAed that 6his kingdom 'as not of
this 'orld6 .5ohn 1813;/B and
.ii/ >e stressed that he had &ome 6not to Fudge the
'orld$ but to sa!e the 'orld6 .5ohn 12179/(
+nstead$ 5esus portrayed himself .:atthe' 1;121/ as a
6suffering ser!ant6 :essiah .+saiah 43/$ one 'ho had
&ome to 6sa!e the lost6 .<uke 13110/ and to enable
people to 6ha!e life abundantly6 .5ohn 10110/(
edemption thus be&ame a matter of a&&epting the
message 'hi&h 5esus had brought and of seiAing the
benefits of the ne' &o!enant .:atthe' 2;128/ to be
established through his death and resurre&tion( .:ore
on this at the end of this &hapter/(
4( %onsummation 5esus 'ill return to 6raise the dead$ Fudge the 'orld
and bring -od0s kingdom to its perfe&tion6 ."tott/(
a( Eld Testament The only Eld Testament referen&e to a &onsummation
prophe&y of the sort meant by "tott is in t'o passages in the 2nd &entury
B(C( latter half of the Book of Daniel1
9113)171 And behold$ 'ith the &louds of hea!en there
&ame one like a son of man ((( and to him 'as
gi!en dominion and glory and kingdomB
12121 And many 'ho sleep in the dust of the earth
shall a'ake$ some to e!erlasting life$ and some
to shame and e!erlasting &ontempt(
b( 5esus The abo!e quotations from Daniel are important
be&ause 5esus0 referred to both of them 'hen talking
about the &onsummation .in :atthe' 27130 and 5ohn
4128)23 respe&ti!ely/(
But it 'ould be 'rong .see Chapter 20/ to assume
that 5esus sa' his return as a time 'hen -od 'ould
!ent his 'rath on mankind( ather$ his !ie' seems to
ha!e been that$ 'ith mankind one day fa&ing
e%tin&tion$ perhaps be&ause of some global natural
disaster$ he 'ould be returning on a res&ue mission(
And it 'ould also be 'rong .again see Chapter 20/ to
assume that 5esus sa' his return as imminent(
&( The ,pistles The early Chur&h$ ho'e!er$ played up 5esus0 se&ond
&oming both as imminent and as a matter of -od0s
!enting his 'rath( Girst$ to en&ourage suffering
Christians that their perse&utors 'ould !ery soon be
punished in full( "e&ond$ to en&ourage all Christians
to li!e pure li!es for the short period remaining( And
third$ as part of the message to non)belie!ers that they
needed to be sa!ed and that time 'as running out(
d( The Book of *evelation +(, speaks of ho' 5esus 'ill deal 'ith the
e!elation &hur&hes Fust prior to his return$ quoting as e%amples
se!eral &hur&hes in Asia :inor( :ost notable is his
supposed threat to punish a 65eAebel6 at Thyatira for
6beguiling my ser!ants to pra&tise immorality and to
eat food sa&rifi&ed to idols6( This &learly refle&ts the
deal 'hi&h ?aul stru&k 'ith the 5erusalem Chur&h in
A&ts 14 and the 'oman in question 'as probably a
dea&oness 'ith aspirations to be&ome the first female
bishop( Ce may not like the pi&ture of 5esus gi!en in
these &hapters$ but 'e should at least note that he is
said to ha!e gi!en the 'oman 6time to repent6(
*evelation -(.. speaks of ho' -od 'ill punish non)
Christians prior to 5esus0 return( But 'ith their talk of
armies mo!ing around on horseba&k rather than in
tanks and heli&opter gunships$ these &hapters &an no
longer be read as a literally true prophe&y of &oming
e!ents( <ess still the talk of a dragon s'eeping do'n
a third of the stars of hea!en and &asting them to the
earth 'hi&h$ if this happened$ 'ould be destroyed in
an instantH e!elation 7)22 should today be read as a
parableB espe&ially sin&e it paints the pi&ture of a -od
unre&ogniAable from the -od portrayed by 5esus(
+ made the point in Chapter 7 that$ 'hile e!en -od himself probably sighs o!er
some of its harsher passages$ the Bible is from start to finish 6the Cord of -od6
and the important thing is to read it 'ith hearts open to the true lo!ing -od( This is
espe&ially the &ase 'ith passages in both the Eld and 2e' Testaments 'hi&h talk
of a punishing -od( And there is usually a simple e%planation for su&h talk1 that
the passage is a parable or$ in the &ase of some propheti& passages$ that -od
deliberately ga!e his message a sharp edge in order to gal!aniAe his &hosen people
into a&tion(
;edem!tion, a new covenant established by (esus' death
+ &lose this &hapter by going ba&k to the point abo!e that 5esus0 death established a
ne' &o!enant( + start 'ith one of 5esus0 o'n statements on the subFe&t of his
forth&oming death$ made during the <ast "upper$ and + 'ould ask you to bear in
mind that :ark0s gospel 'as 'ritten first$ 'ith mu&h of its 'ording later &opied by
:atthe' .see Chapter 19/1
:ark 171271 This is my blood of the Jne'K &o!enant$ 'hi&h is
poured out for many(
:atthe' 2;1281 This is my blood of the Jne'K &o!enant$ 'hi&h is
poured out for many for the forgi!eness of sins(
The E%ford Bible Commentary remarks as follo's on these !erses1
The final phrase in :ark .0poured out for many0/ is a &lear
indi&ation that 5esus0 death is being seen in sa&rifi&ial terms(
>o'e!er$ 5e'ish sa&rifi&e 'as !ery !aried and by no means
mono&hrome( Chat is not said here is that 5esus0 death is a sin
offering or a means of dealing 'ith indi!idual sins or sinfulness
.:atthe' adds 0for the forgi!eness of sins0 here$ but this is &learly
se&ondary/( ather$ 5esus0 death is interpreted here as a covenant
sa&rifi&e$ the means by 'hi&h a ne' community is &reated by -od0s
o'n initiati!e .see too on :ark 10174/B by drinking the &up$ the
dis&iples share in all the benefits established by 5esus0 sa&rifi&e$ i(e(
they take their pla&es as members of the ne' people of -od$ the
ne' &o!enant &ommunity( JE%ford Bible Commentary$ p( 31;K
2e%t$ and prompted by the abo!e$ 'e look at another of 5esus0 statements about his
death$ made rather earlier 'hen on his 'ay to 5erusalem1
:ark 101741 The "on of man also &ame not to be ser!ed but to ser!e$ and to
gi!e his life as a ransom for many(
The E%ford Bible Commentary remarks as follo's on this !erse1
J:ark 10174K &omprises the famous ransom saying and has gi!en
rise to intense debate( +t is one of the !ery fe' !erses in the
synopti&s 'here 5esus gi!es any kind of interpretation of his death(
+ts authenti&ity is mu&h disputed$ as is the pre&ise meaning of
!irtually e!ery 'ord in the saying( The saying ((( assumes that
5esus0 death is unique$ and yet :ark uses it in a &onte%t 'here
5esus sets himself up as an e%ample to be imitated by others( The
ba&kground is often taken to be +saiah 43$ 'ith 5esus here setting
himself up as the suffering ser!ant of this "er!ant "ong$ offering
his life as a sin offering for others( This is$ ho'e!er$ un&on!in&ing(
The linguisti& parallels bet'een this !erse and +saiah 43 are
!irtually non)e%istent( 5esus is not here &alled 0ser!ant0B nor is the
language of 0ransom0 the same semanti&ally as that of 0sin offering0(
The present !erse does not e!en mention 0sin0 as su&h(
The 'ord 0ransom0 .-reek lutron/ is in fa&t used !ery 'idely$
sometimes in relation to pri&es being paid$ e(g( as the pri&e paid to
&ompensate for a &rime ((( >en&e the idea in later Christian
theology of 5esus0 death as some kind of pri&e that is paid .e(g( for
sin/( But the 'ord is also used 'ithout any idea of a spe&ifi& pri&e
being paid1 thus -od0s deli!eran&e of his people in the ,%odus is
frequently referred to as his 0ransoming0 or 0redeeming0 the people
of -od$ 'ith no idea of any pri&e being paid( This may be the
underlying idea here1 5esus0 death is presented as in some 'ay the
res&ue$ or redemption$ of the ne' people of -od(
Chy this needs a death is not spelt out( "tri&tly speaking$ the
preposition translated in the 2"# as 0for0 .-reek anti/ means
0instead of01 hen&e ideas of substitutionary atonement 'hi&h ha!e
been read into$ or out of$ this !erse( But this is by no means
ne&essary( The 'ord may simply mean 0on behalf of0$ 0for the
benefit of0 ((( 5esus0 saying here thus e!okes the idea of a ne'
people of -od to be &reated and formed as a result of his life and
death( Gurther$ it is by !irtue of his role as "on of :an$ as the one
'ho must suffer but 'ho 'ill then be !indi&ated$ that this 'ill be
a&hie!ed( JE%ford Bible Commentary$ p( 308K
Gor me$ the problem 'ith the idea of 5esus0 death as a 6sin offering6 is that many
Christians imagine that -od deliberately put his "on through an unspeakably &ruel
death on the &ross in order to be able to forgi!e mankind0s sins 'ithout detriment to
his position as a Fust -od( Their supposition here is that -od 'as 6punishing6 5esus
on the &ross for our sins be&ause he 'ould other'ise ha!e been obliged to punish
us and therefore to e%&lude all of us from hea!en sin&e 6all ha!e sinned6(
>o'e!er$ + see a perfe&tly &lear e%planation for 5esus0 'ords 'hi&h has nothing at
all to do 'ith a punishing -od( 5esus &ame to bring a message about -od0s lo!e
and forgi!eness$ a message 'hi&h ran &ounter to e!ery religion at the time( To be
fair to the 5e's and the omans$ they left him unhindered for three 'hole years(
But e!entually e!en their patien&e ran out$ espe&ially after he staged a
demonstration inside the Temple( "o the ine!itable finally happened( >e died for
his message$ paying the pri&e .6ransom6/ for bringing the good ne's 'hi&h
e!eryone needs to hear1 that -od is a lo!ing Gather 'ho al'ays forgi!es a truly
repentant sinner(
"o 'hy did ?aul .in ,phesians 119/ and ?eter .in 1 ?eter 2127/ later speak in terms
of 5esus0 death as a 6sin offering6I :y reply is that they 'ere probably responding
to the 5e'ish question .refle&ted in >ebre's 3122/$ 6>o' &an -od forgi!e sins
'ithout the shedding of bloodI6 Their response 'as$ in effe&t$ that blood had been
shed1 the blood of 5esus(
Chapter !! The 9e""a3e of /e"(" and the
Chri"tian 9e""a3e

The Christian message is by definition the message brought by 5esus .in the
-ospels/$ set in the &onte%t of 'hat -od had re!ealed before 5esus &ame .in the
Eld Testament/ and of 'hat -od re!ealed through the >oly "pirit after 5esus died
.in the ,pistles and the Book of e!elation/(
=nfortunately$ ho'e!er$ some Christians see neither -od nor the Bible in the
&orre&t light and therefore miss some key elements of the Christian message( + set
out in Chapters 20 and 21 positi!e approa&hes to -od and to the Bible( + no' take
a &loser look at the message of 5esus himself(
(esus the Son of God
The first part of 5esus0 message relates to his &laim to be the "on of -od( And three
&omments by modern 'riters are 'ell 'orth repeating here(
Girst$ C("( <e'is0 &omment in :ere Christianity1
Among the 5e's there suddenly turns up a man 'ho goes about
talking as if >e 'as -od( >e &laims to forgi!e sins J:ark 214K( >e
says >e has al'ays e%isted( >e says >e is &oming to Fudge the
'orld at the end of time(
Ene part of the &laim tends to slip past us unnoti&ed be&ause 'e
ha!e heard it so often that 'e no longer see 'hat it amounts to(
+ mean the &laim to forgi!e sins( 2o' unless the speaker is -od$
this is really so preposterous as to be &omi&( Ce &an all
understand ho' a man forgi!es offen&es against himself( *ou
tread on my toe and + forgi!e you( But 'hat should 'e make of
a man 'ho announ&ed that he forga!e you for treading on other
men0s toes and stealing other men0s moneyI
+ am trying here to pre!ent anyone saying the really foolish thing
that people often say about >im1 6+0m ready to a&&ept 5esus as a
great moral tea&her$ but + don0t a&&ept >is &laim to be -od(6
That is the one thing that 'e must not say( A man 'ho 'as merely
a man and said the sort of things 5esus said 'ould not be a great
moral tea&her( >e 'ould either be a lunati& ) on a le!el 'ith a man
'ho says he is a poa&hed egg ) or else he 'ould be the De!il of
>ell( *ou must make your &hoi&e( ,ither this man 'as$ and is$ the
"on of -odB or else a madman or something 'orse(
JC("( <e'is$ :ere Christianity$ pp( 41)42K
"e&ond$ 5ohn "tott0s &omment in Basi& Christianity1
JTheK self)&entredness of the tea&hing of 5esus immediately sets
him apart from the other great religious tea&hers of the 'orld(
They 'ere self)effa&ing( >e 'as self)ad!an&ing( They pointed men
a'ay from themsel!es$ saying$ 0That is the truth$ so far as +
per&ei!e itB follo' that0( 5esus said$ 0+ am the truthB follo' me0(
J5ohn "tott$ Basi& Christianity$ p( 23K
Third$ 5ohn Drane0s &omment in 5esus and the four -ospels1
Ce must ne!er forget that 'hen 'e des&ribe 5esus as 0the "on of
-od0 'e are using pi&torial language to des&ribe something that
is in prin&iple indes&ribable( 5esus 'as using an analogy( >e took
the human relationship of &hild to parent$ and said1 0:y
relationship 'ith -od is rather like that0( >e did not intend us to
take the analogy literally( 2or 'as he suggesting that e!ery aspe&t
of our o'n relationship to our parents fits e%a&tly the relationship
bet'een 5esus and -od (((
2o human &ould e!er say$ 0+ and my Gather are one0( +ndeed$ the
'hole of 5esus0 tea&hing$ espe&ially in 5ohn0s -ospel$ makes it
&lear that this relationship bet'een Gather and "on 'as unique( +t
e%isted long before 5esus 'as born in Bethlehem1 5esus 'as 0in the
beginning 'ith -od0( J5ohn Drane$ 5esus and the four -ospels$ p( 42K
(esus' manifesto
The other part of 5esus0 message is 'hat + shall &all his 6manifesto6 and 'hi&h +
shall sum up as follo's1
1( -od is a lo!ing Gather 'ho punishes no one either in this
life or in the ne%t .this point &o!ered in Chapter 20/(
2( +f 'e 'ant to enFoy meaningful li!es on this earth and to
enter into hea!en at the time of the resurre&tion of the dead$
then 'e need to do -od0s 'ill .:atthe' 9121/ by belie!ing
in 5esus$ repenting and learning to lo!e$ trust and obey -od(
3( >a!ing done all this$ 'e then need to safeguard our prospe&t
of entering hea!en by lo!ing our enemies$ forgi!ing others
and not Fudging others(
The resurrection of the dead
As noted in Chapter 21$ the idea of the resurre&tion of the dead goes ba&k to the
Eld Testament !erse Daniel 1212$ 'ritten in the 2nd &entury B(C(1
And many 'ho sleep in the dust of the earth shall a'ake$ some to
e!erlasting life$ and some to shame and e!erlasting &ontempt(
=nderstandably$ and as alluded to in :atthe' 22123)32 and A&ts 231;)8$ the
"addu&ees and ?harisees 'ere debating this subFe&t intensely at the time of 5esus(
The "addu&ees reFe&ted the idea of any sort of resurre&tion of the dead( Chereas$ to
Fudge by 5esus0 'ords in :atthe' 22123)32$ the ?harisees belie!ed in a future
resurre&tion of both soul and body(
+n 5ohn 4128)23 5esus made mu&h the same point as Daniel had earlier1
The hour is &oming 'hen all 'ho are in the tombs 'ill hear Jthe
"on of man0sK !oi&e and &ome forth$ those 'ho ha!e done good$ to
the resurre&tion of life$ and those 'ho ha!e done e!il$ to the
resurre&tion of Fudgment(
But 5esus broke ne' ground in :atthe' 22123)32 'hen$ in ans'er to the
"addu&ees0 question .about 'hose 'ife the mu&h)married 'oman 'ill be after the
resurre&tion/$ he said1
*ou are 'rong( Gor in the resurre&tion they neither marry nor are
gi!en in marriage$ but are like angels in hea!en(
Chat 5esus meant here 'as that the "addu&ees 'ere 'rong in t'o 'ays( Girst$ in
denying any sort of resurre&tion of the dead( And se&ond$ in presuming that he
shared the ?harisees0 !ie' that the e!entual resurre&tion of all the dead 'ill in!ol!e
both their souls and their bodies( 5esus0 !ie' 'as instead &learly that only the souls
of the dead 'ill enter hea!en( Any ne' body that they ha!e there 'ill be spiritual$
not physi&al(
5eaven and 5ell
+ mentioned in Chapter 20 that 5esus o&&asionally spoke of hell as a 6furna&e of
fire6$ but more usually as a pla&e of 6outer darkness6 ) of total loneliness ) 'here
people 6'ill 'eep and gnash their teeth6( To understand matters here 'e need to go
ba&k to something 'hi&h + said about -od in Chapter 2$ and to e%pand a diagram
'hi&h + ga!e there( >ea!en and hell are not spiritual realms$ 'ith the first e%isting
'ay beyond our gala%y and the se&ond deep 'ithin the bo'els of the earth( ather$
they e%ist in separate parts of a spiritual dimension interse&ting 'ith the four
spa&e)time dimensions deep inside ea&h of our minds .the !erse <uke 191211 6The
kingdom of -od is 'ithin you6 is rele!ant here and + shall ha!e more to say on this
subFe&t in Chapter 23/1
+t is our souls .only/ 'hi&h 'ill be in either hea!en or hell and so t'o points
emerge here( Girst$ that hell 'ill not be a pla&e of physical pain( And se&ond that$
'hen in :atthe' 4123 .see belo'/ 5esus speaks of 6plu&king out an eye that &auses
us to sin$ be&ause it is better to lose one eye than that your 'hole body be thro'n
into hell6$ 'e are not to take this in any 'ay literally1 5esus is making a logical
point(
7oing God's will
:atthe' 9121)23 sets out one of 5esus0 most important statements1
2ot e!eryone 'ho says to me$ 0<ord$ <ord0$ shall enter the
kingdom of hea!en$ but he 'ho does the 'ill of my Gather 'ho is
in hea!en( En that day many 'ill say to me$ 0<ord$ <ord$ did 'e
not prophesy in your name$ and &ast out demons in your name$ and
do many mighty 'orks in your nameI0 And then + 'ill de&lare to
them$ 0+ ne!er kne' youB depart from me$ you e!ildoers0(
5esus gi!es in 5ohn ;128)23 the first of four ans'ers to the ob!ious question here$
6Chat does doing -od0s 'ill entailI61
Then they said to him$ 6Chat must 'e do$ to be doing the 'orks of
-odI6 5esus ans'ered them$ 6This is the 'ork of -od$ that you
belie!e in him 'hom he has sent6(
+ shall deal 'ith the question of 6belie!ing6 a little later in this &hapter(
The se&ond ans'er to the question stemming from :atthe' 9121)23 is found in
t'o of 5esus0 'ell)kno'n parables$ the first in :atthe' 9127)291
,!ery one 'ho hears these 'ords of mine and does them 'ill be
like a 'ise man 'ho built his house upon the ro&kB and the rain
fell$ and the floods &ame$ and the 'inds ble' and beat upon that
house$ but it did not fall$ be&ause it had been founded on the ro&k(
And e!ery one 'ho hears these 'ords of mine and does not do
them 'ill be like a foolish man 'ho built his house upon the sandB
and the rain fell$ and the floods &ame$ and the 'inds ble' and beat
upon that house$ and it fellB and great 'as the fall of it(
5esus0 &onte%t here is a man building a bea&hfront house( And 5esus0 point is that
the primary &onsideration is a proper foundation( A house built dire&tly on the sand
'ill ne!er sur!i!e a storm1 it needs to be built on solid ro&k( And for people 'ho
'ant to 6ha!e life abundantly6 .5ohn 10110/ and later enter hea!en .:atthe' 9121/$
the proper foundation is belief in 5esus$ repentan&e and a determination to 6do the
'ill of -od6(
The other parable$ that of the "o'er$ is an e%tension of the first( :atthe' 13 gi!es
both the parable and 5esus0 e%planation1
The !arable itself J1317)8K (esus' e*!lanation J13113)23K
1( "ome seeds fell along the Chen any one hears the 'ord of
path and the birds &ame the kingdom and does not under)
and de!oured them( stand it$ the e!il one &omes (((
2( Ether seeds fell on ro&ky JAnotherK hears the 'ord and
ground$ 'here they had not immediately re&ei!es it 'ith FoyB
mu&h soil ((( 'hen the sun yet he has no root in himself$ but
rose they 'ere s&or&hedB endures for a 'hileB and 'hen
and sin&e they had no root$ tribulation or perse&ution arises on
they 'ithered a'ay( a&&ount of the 'ord (((
3( Ether seeds fell upon thorns$ JAnotherK hears the 'ord$ but the
and the thorns gre' up and &ares of the 'orld and the delight
&hoked them( in ri&hes &hoke the 'ord (((
7( Ether seeds fell on good JAnotherK hears the 'ord$ under)
soil and brought forth grain( stands it and bears fruit(
Ef the four types of people here$ the se&ond equates to the foolish man in :atthe'
9127)29 'ho builds his house on the sand1 'ith no foundation of belief and
repentan&e( And the third type of person here represents a man 'ho 'isely builds
his house upon the ro&k but then makes the mistake of not keeping it properly
maintained( A man 'ho ne!er learns to lo!e$ trust and obey -od ) and to lo!e his
enemies and to forgi!e and not Fudge others ) and ends up 'ith his faith &rumbling
from 'ithin(
The third ans'er to the question stemming from :atthe' 9121)23 is gi!en in
:atthe' 9112)171
Chate!er you 'ish that men 'ould do to you$ do so to themB for
this is the la' and the prophets( ,nter by the narro' gateB for the
gate is 'ide and the 'ay is easy$ that leads to destru&tion$ and
those 'ho enter by it are many( Gor the gate is narro' and the 'ay
is hard$ that leads to life$ and those 'ho find it are fe'(
5esus0 first point here is that 'hile 6<o!e the <ord your -od 'ith all your heart6
.Deuteronomy ;14/ is the greatest &ommandment in the Eld Testament .:atthe'
22134)38/$ all its other &ommandments ) in&luding 6<o!e your neighbour as
yourself6 .<e!iti&us 13118/ ) are summed up by the rule$ 6Chate!er you 'ish that
men 'ould do to you$ do so to them6(
5esus0 se&ond point is that$ for the Christian$ there is a 'ide gate and a narro' gate(
The 'ide gate is the 'orldly one of 6Do not do to others 'hat you 'ould not 'ant
them to do to you6 and 'ill ne!er enable the Christian to rea&h the le!el of &on&ern
for others that 5esus demands in :atthe' 24134)70 .+ 'as hungry and you ga!e me
food (((/( The narro' gate is the one 5esus 'ants us to enter$ one 'hereby 'e 6Do
for others 'hat 'e 'ould 'ant them to do for us if we were in their position6(
The fourth ans'er to the question stemming from :atthe' 9121)23 is &ontained in
a number of 5esus0 other statements in the 6"ermon on the :ount6 .:atthe' 4)9/$
many of them 'ith a fairly hard edge(
The hardest)edged things of all in the "ermon on the :ount are 5esus0 so)&alled
6hard sayings6 'here he &omments on the ;th)8th Commandments and e%plains
ho' 'e all break all of them at some points in our li!es1
J;th Commandment( *ou shall not killK1 ,!ery one 'ho is angry
'ith his brother shall be liable to Fudgment ((( 'hoe!er says$
0*ou foolH0 shall be liable to the hell of fire .:atthe' 4122/(
J9th Commandment( *ou shall not &ommit adulteryK1 ,!eryone
'ho looks at a 'oman lustfully has already &ommitted
adultery 'ith her in his heart( +f your right eye &auses you to
sin$ plu&k it out and thro' it a'ayB it is better that you lose
one of your members than that your 'hole body be thro'n
into hell .:atthe' 4128)23/(
J8th Commandment( *ou shall not stealK1 -i!e to him 'ho begs
from you$ and do not refuse him 'ho 'ould borro' from
you .:atthe' 4172/(
These sayings are strikingly different to anything outside the -ospels and there are
three 'ays of regarding them( Ce &an take them literally( Er 'e &an see them as
ideals 'hi&h 'e &an aspire to but ne!er a&hie!e in pra&ti&e( Er$ and most sensibly$
'e &an see them as a mi% of logi& .it is better to enter hea!en 'ith one eye/$
&ommon sense .'e should a!oid slippery slopes like gaping at 'omen/ and
&ommand .as in the &ase of :atthe' 4172$ -i!e to him 'ho begs from you (((/(
,!eryone re&ogniAes that 'e should not take :atthe' 4123 literally1
+f your right eye &auses you to sin$ plu&k it out and thro' it a'ay(
But if our problem is a ro!ing eye then 'e must do 'hat might seem to be equally
unthinkable$ su&h as resigning from our Fob in order to get a'ay from a parti&ular
sour&e of temptation(
And 5esus &learly meant us to take literally both :atthe' 4172 .-i!e to him 'ho
begs from you/ and his pre&eding 'ords in :atthe' 4133)711
Do not resist one 'ho is e!il( But if anyone strikes you on the right
&heek$ turn to him the other alsoB and if any one 'ould sue you and
take your &oat$ let him ha!e your &loak as 'ell (((
6Turning the other &heek6 is the sensible thing to do if 'e are !i&tims of &rime$
unless our lo!ed ones are in immediate danger and 'e kno' something about self)
defen&eB under normal &ir&umstan&es 'e should rely on brain rather than bra'n(
$elieving. re!enting and learning to love. trust and obey God
5esus0 message &an be summed up as belie!ing$ repenting and learning to lo!e$
trust and obey -od( "o + shall deal 'ith ea&h in turn(
$elieving
+ mentioned earlier 5ohn ;128)23$ 'here 5esus says that 6the 'ork of -od is that
you belie!e in him 'hom he has sent6( Ce &an tie this in 'ith 'hat 5esus says later
in 5ohn 171;1
+ am the 'ay$ and the truth$ and the lifeB no one &omes to the
Gather$ but by me(
Ce need to be &lear$ ho'e!er$ about 'hat 5esus is saying here( The best and only
means of &oming really &lose to -od in this life is by belie!ing in 5esus( Cithout
5esus$ the gate and the 'ay of :atthe' 9113)17 be&ome e!en narro'er and harder(
But 5esus ne!er said that -od 'ould e%&lude from hea!en e!en those 'ho 6lo!e
-od 'ith all their heart6$ repent of all their sins and obey the rule 6Chate!er you
'ish that men 'ould do to you$ do so to them6$ simply be&ause they ha!e ne!er
belie!ed in 5esus( 5ohn 3118 .6>e 'ho does not belie!e is &ondemned already6/ is a
&omment by the author of 5ohn$ not a statement by 5esus(
The purpose of Christian mission is to help people to belie!e in 5esus and to guide
them on their 'ay to hea!en( But it is not enough Fust to belie!e in 5esus and$ as
'e shall see later on in this &hapter$ many Christians today are putting their
sal!ation at risk by disobeying some key &ommands in the "ermon on the :ount(
And e!en though -od has gi!en his signature to A&ts 7112 .6there is no other name
under hea!en gi!en among men by 'hi&h 'e must be sa!ed6/$ it 'ill ultimately be
-od$ not us$ 'ho de&ides 'hom he 'ill e!entually a&&ept into his home(
;e!enting
5esus laid Fust as mu&h stress on repenting as on belie!ing1
:atthe' 71191 epent$ for the kingdom of hea!en is at hand(
<uke 13131 =nless you repent you 'ill all like'ise perish(
epentan&e is not Fust a &ase of saying sorry to -od and to the person 'e sinned
against( 5ust as important is our stri!ing in future to 6do to others 'hat 'e 'ould
ha!e them do to us6 .:atthe' 9112/( But the spe&ial en&ouragement that 5esus
gi!es us here .in the parable of the Ci&ked Tenants$ see Chapter 4/ is that -od
urges sinners time and again to turn to him in repentan&e and al'ays forgi!es those
'ho do so sin&erely(
<earning to love. trust and obey God
Ene of 5esus0 lo!eliest sayings is :atthe' 11128)301
Come unto me$ all 'ho labour and are hea!y laden$ and + 'ill gi!e
you rest( Take my yoke upon you$ and learn from meB for + am
gentle and lo'ly in heart$ and you 'ill find rest for your souls( Gor
my yoke is easy$ and my burden is light(
5esus is saying t'o things here( Girst$ that 'e need to learn to lo!e$ trust and obey
-od( And se&ond$ that obeying -od is not at all a matter of our being subFe&ted to a
&rushing burden of rules and regulations( +ndeed 'e &an note that these points also
emerge from the Adam and ,!e parable 'hi&h$ although primarily about repenting$
is also in part about the need to lo!e$ trust and obey -od( Adam and ,!e sa' -od
as an imposer of rules and a punisher of sins rather than a lo!ing Gather( "o they
did not lo!e him and this made it impossible for them to trust him and to obey him(
"omething 'hi&h 5esus himself made &lear in 5ohn 17114 'hen saying$ 6+f you
lo!e me$ you 'ill keep my &ommandments6(
Apart from one point 'hi&h + &ome to ne%t$ + shall lea!e the rest of 'hat 5esus says
about lo!ing$ trusting and obeying -od until Chapters 27)24(
Safeguarding our !ros!ect of entering heaven
eturning to the subFe&t of the "ermon on the :ount in :atthe' 4)9$ 'e need to
look finally at three &ommands 'hi&h all Christians must obey if they are to
safeguard their prospe&t of entering hea!en(
Girst$ :atthe' 4177)7; reads as follo's1
<o!e your enemies and pray for those 'ho perse&ute you$ so that
you may be sons of your Gather 'ho is in hea!enB for he makes his
sun rise on the e!il and on the good$ and sends rain on the Fust and
on the unFust( Gor if you lo!e JonlyK those 'ho lo!e you$ 'hat
re'ard ha!e youI Do not e!en the ta% &olle&tors do the sameI
There are three reasons 'hy 'e should lo!e our enemies( Girst$ be&ause &ommon
sense tells us that holding on to hatreds ser!es no useful purpose and that sooner or
later 'e may get oursel!es into trouble by saying or doing something 'hi&h
brea&hes the la'( "e&ond$ be&ause 'e risk poisoning the minds of the ne%t
generation( Third$ be&ause if 'e persist in hating our enemies then -od 'ill be
obliged to e%&lude us from hea!en1 so as not to spoil it for those of our enemies
'ho 'ill be thereH
"e&ond$ :atthe' ;117)14 reads as follo's1
+f you forgi!e men their trespasses$ your hea!enly Gather 'ill
forgi!e youB but if you do not forgi!e men their trespasses$ neither
'ill your Gather forgi!e your trespasses(
There are four reasons for forgi!ing others$ regardless of 'hether or not they seek
our forgi!eness( Girst$ be&ause e!ery one of us has at some time been forgi!en by
someone else( "e&ond$ be&ause holding on to our unforgi!eness 'ill take a
gro'ing toll on our health and mind( Third$ and espe&ially for Christians$ be&ause
if 'e do not forgi!e others then -od 'ill dra' the &on&lusion that 'e are not at all
grateful for his forgi!eness and that our repentan&e 'as ne!er real in the first pla&e
.:atthe' 18123)34/$ 'hi&h 'ill oblige him to e%&lude us from hea!en( And fourth$
be&ause 'hate!er terrible thing 'as done to us is .in 5esus0 analogy in <uke 9171)
72/ a 6bad debt6( Ce are probably ne!er going to be 6repaid6 and so the 'ise thing
to do is to 6'rite it off6$ Fust as a bank 'ould( +ndeed this is part of the point 5esus
makes in <uke 1;18 'hen he says1
The sons of this 'orld are more shre'd in dealing 'ith their
generation than the sons of light(
Third$ :atthe' 911)2 reads as follo's1
5udge not$ that you be not Fudged( Gor 'ith the Fudgment you
pronoun&e you 'ill be Fudged$ and the measure you gi!e 'ill be
the measure you get(
:any Christians disobey 5esus0 &ommand not to Fudge others$ perhaps in part
be&ause they &onfuse it 'ith 'hat 5esus says in :atthe' 18114)191
+f your brother sins against you$ go and tell him his fault$ bet'een
you and him alone( +f he listens to you$ you ha!e gained your
brother( But if he does not listen$ take one or t'o others along 'ith
you$ that e!ery 'ord may be &onfirmed by the e!iden&e of t'o or
three 'itnesses( +f he refuses to listen to them$ tell it to the &hur&h(
Ef &ourse 'e ha!e to do something about blatant misbeha!iour on the part of
fello' &hur&h)members$ although e!en then 'e must do so in a 'ay that gi!es
them e!ery opportunity to repent1 in e%a&tly the same 'ay that -od treats us( But
Fudging people outside the Chur&h is something that 5esus e%pressly forbids and +
shall &ome ba&k to it in Chapter 24(
The %hristian :essage
+ suggested at the start of this &hapter that some Christians$ seeing -od and the
Bible in the 'rong light$ miss some key elements of the Christian message( + had in
mind parti&ularly the 'ay that some people treat passages about a harsh punishing
-od as literally true rather than as parable( But of &ourse the Christian message is
not &onfined to the message of 5esus$ and + &lose this &hapter 'ith a fe' e%amples
'here other Bible passages !ery helpfully supplement 'hat 5esus said(
5ames 2117)19 is espe&ially important be&ause it ser!es as a bridge bet'een 'hat
5esus and ?aul said on the question of faith(
+n ,phesians 218)3 ?aul emphasiAed the pre)eminen&e of faith in sal!ation1
By gra&e you ha!e been sa!ed through faithB and this is not your
o'n doing$ it is the gift of -od ) not be&ause of 'orks$ lest any
man should boast(
5ames 2117)19 helpfully approa&hes matters from the opposite dire&tion and$
'ithout in any 'ay &ontradi&ting ?aul$ stresses the need for 6'orks6 .things done
in furtheran&e of 5esus0 'ords in :atthe' 9112/ as 'ell1
Chat does it profit$ my brethren$ if a man says he has faith but has
not 'orks ((( +f a brother or sister is ill)&lad and in la&k of daily
food$ and one of you says to them$ 6-o in pea&e$ be 'armed and
filled6$ 'ithout gi!ing them the things needed for the body$ 'hat
does it profitI "o faith by itself$ if it has no 'orks$ is dead(
1 5ohn 118)3 similarly supplements 'hat 5esus said about repentan&e1
+f 'e say 'e ha!e no sin$ 'e de&ei!e oursel!es$ and the truth is not
in us( +f 'e &onfess our sins$ he is faithful and Fust$ and 'ill
forgi!e our sins and &leanse us from all unrighteousness(
T'o points emerge here( Girst$ many Christians do sin ) often quite deliberately )
subsequent to &on!ersion( And se&ond$ it is 'rong to suppose either that these sins
are already 6&o!ered6 by the repentan&e made at the time of &on!ersion or .as
>ebre's 1012;)29 suggests/ that they &annot be forgi!en( -od &hases after
Christian sinners and non)Christian sinners alike$ offering forgi!eness in return for
repentan&e(
Ginally$ on the question of our learning to lo!e$ trust and obey -od$ 'e find
illustrations throughout the Bible( 2egati!e e%amples in&lude the Adam and ,!e
story .as mentioned abo!e/$ the misbeha!iour during the 6'andering in the
'ilderness6 and the Christians 'hom ?aul &riti&iAes in 1 Corinthians 311)3 as still
being 6babes in Christ6( But there are positi!e e%amples too$ ranging from
Abraham and :oses in the Eld Testament to the many fine e%amples of Christians
in the 2e'( ?ro!ided 'e adopt the right approa&h to the Bible$ the Christian
message is the message of 5esus$ neatly sand'i&hed bet'een a prologue about ho'
the 5e's and their an&estors did their best to understand -od before 5esus &ame
and an epilogue about ho' the Chur&h spent the first fe' de&ades after his death
getting to grips 'ith the message and the lega&y that he left behind(
PART ,II FACIN5 UP TO T+E C+ALLEN5ES
OF T+E
!1ST CENTUR*

Chapter !# Defendin3 the Chri"tian
9e""a3e
T'o of the main &hallenges fa&ing the Chur&h in the 21st &entury 'ill &ontinue to
be those of defending and e%plaining the Christian message( Defending the
message 'hen &onfronted by atheists$ 'hom 'e &an liken to the "addu&ees 'ho
asked 5esus 'hose 'ife$ in the ne%t life$ 'ould be the 'oman 'ho married se!en
brothers in turn .:atthe' 22/( And e%plaining the message to people 'ho$ like the
man in :atthe' 13$ ha!e sin&ere questions to 'hi&h they 'ant honest ans'ers( +
shall deal in this &hapter 'ith the question of defending the Christian message(
7efending the %hristian message when confronted by atheists
>o' do Christians respond to atheist doubtsI =sually they either reply 6-od0s
'ord says (((6 or use a form of logi& seldom &on!in&ing to people 'ho think for
themsel!es( + begin$ then$ by suggesting an alternati!e approa&h 'hi&h$ although
perhaps stret&hing the en!elope of orthodo%y$ 'ould &ertainly ha!e 'orked better
'ith me 'hen + 'as an atheist(
Atheists ha!e three main doubts( Girst$ they doubt -od0s !ery e%isten&e( "e&ond$ in
relation to -enesis 1$ they question the idea that -od &reated the entire uni!erse
and e!erything in it$ in&luding mankind$ o!er a period of a mere si% days( And
third$ in relation to -enesis 2$ they question the idea that -od &reated the !ery first
man out of the dust of the ground(
God
All Christians belie!e in -od( +ndeed$ 'ith e!ery &reed$ &onfession and &ate&hism
stating &learly that 5esus 'as and is the "on of -od$ it 'ould be impossible to be a
Christian and not belie!e in -od(
This said$ ho'e!er$ not all Christians share the same pi&ture of -od( "ome see him
abo!e all as the Creator of the uni!erse$ a -od no' li!ing 'ay beyond our gala%y(
Ethers see him abo!e all as a personal -od$ the one no' li!ing inside their hearts(
And many Christians try to ha!e it both 'ays$ gi!ing the t'o !ery different
pi&tures equal 'eight(
Christians also differ o!er the &hara&ter they as&ribe to -od( "ome see him as
lo!ing Gather 'ho forgi!es them 'hen they &onfess their sins to him and 'ho
&omforts them and gi!es them good ad!i&e 'hen they take their problems to him
in prayer( Ether Christians$ ho'e!er$ regarding themsel!es as no' sa!ed and
guaranteed pla&es in hea!en$ see -od as a harsh Fudge 'ho punishes the 'i&ked in
this life and 'ho 'ill take further re!enge on the finally unrepentant 'hen they
e!entually appear before his throne and are senten&ed to eternal punishment in hell(
Atheists are understandably offended and amused at the same time by all of this(
Effended by the impli&ation that they are foremost among 6the 'i&ked6( And
amused at the 'ay Christians seemingly &annot de&ide 'hether -od is 6up there6
or 6do'n here6(
Gor the atheist$ Christian belief in -od is like a &hild0s belief in Gather Christmas(
There is the "anta Claus the &hild meets in a department store( And there is the
unseen "anta Claus 'ho$ despite li!ing at the 2orth ?ole$ supposedly single)
handedly deli!ers e!ery &hild0s presents all o!er the globe in the early hours of 24
De&ember( Children e!entually see the nonsense in this$ yet Christians still talk
about a -od 'ho is either in t'o pla&es at the same time or able to &ommuni&ate
'ith them from billions of miles a'ay 'ithout any sort of 6time delay6 in the
&on!ersation(
Atheists are$ moreo!er$ sho&ked at the 'ay the -od of the Eld Testament orders his
6&hosen people6 to &arry out a thorough ethni& &leansing as they mar&h into the
6promised land6( And they are further sho&ked by the idea that the -od of the 2e'
Testament intends to bring the 'orld to a equally bloody end 'hen he sends 5esus
ba&k in his !engeful 6se&ond &oming6( Cho$ they ask$ 'ould 'ant to belie!e in
su&h an a'ful -odI And this is e!en before they get on to the question of Creation(
+ ga!e in Chapters 13 and 21 respe&ti!ely my ans'ers regarding the a&&ount of the
ethni& &leansing in the Book of 5oshua and the a&&ount of 5esus0 se&ond &oming in
e!elation( And + shall gi!e a full ans'er at the end of this &hapter to the question
of 'hether -od is 6up there6 or 6do'n here6( A&&ordingly$ + shall de!ote the rest of
this &hapter to the atheists0 doubts about 'hat is said in -enesis 1 and in the Adam
and ,!e story(
God's role as %reator of the universe
:any Christians$ &on!in&ed that the uni!erse &ame about as a result of 6intelligent
design6 and 'as &reated e%a&tly 'ithin the times&ale set out in -enesis 1$ reFe&t
'hat s&ien&e tells us about the origins of the uni!erse and are una'are of 'hat
Augustine tells us about time(
"&ien&e tells us &ategori&ally that that Creation did not happen literally o!er a si%)
day period( +nstead$ s&ien&e makes it &lear that the uni!erse .and time itself/ began
'ith a big bang 13(9 billion years ago(
Augustine did not ha!e the benefits of modern s&ien&e but$ as mentioned in
Chapter 11$ he dedu&ed from reason 6that time 'as a property of the uni!erse that
-od &reated$ and that time did not e%ist before the beginning of the uni!erse6( >e
also suggested that$ as @eith Card puts it in Christianity1 A "hort +ntrodu&tion1
-od$ as the &reator of time$ is beyond the limitations of time( -od
e%ists 0eternally0 ) that is$ not in time as 'e understand it at all( +t is
from that timeless eternity that -od &reates the 'hole spa&e)time
uni!erse( J@eith Card$ Christianity1 A "hort +ntrodu&tion$ p( 10K
Atheists$ for e%ample i&hard Da'kins in his book The -od Delusion$ take up
s&ien&e0s point that time began at the moment of the big bang but dis&ount
Augustine0s suggestion that -od is 6beyond the limitations of time6( "o they argue
that$ e!en if there is a -od$ he &ould ne!er ha!e brought about the big bang
be&ause that 'ould ha!e required massi!e intelligen&e and intelligent beings take
time to e!ol!e(
Atheists therefore reFe&t the !ie' of many Christians that the perfe&tion of the
uni!erse .and$ for e%ample$ our planet0s lo&ation and orbit/ is due to 6intelligent
design6( +nstead$ atheists point to the 6anthropi& prin&iple6 of s&ien&e as pro!iding
a far better approa&h to matters(
+ am not a s&ientist and although 'e 'ill return to the anthropi& prin&iple later$
'hen looking at 'hat atheists say about the origins of life on earth$ + shall for the
moment make only four &omments on -enesis 1(
Girst$ the si%)days Creation a&&ount 'as brought into -enesis from the sour&e
do&ument P$ itself 'ritten in the ;th &entury B(C( in Babylon( This makes it likely
that the a&&ount 'as 'ritten as a rebuff to the Babylonian myths 'hi&h the 5e's
&ame a&ross 'hen they arri!ed in Babylon in 489 B(C( at the start of their e%ile(
"e&ond$ -enesis 1 sets out 'hat is in se!eral 'ays a remarkably a&&urate
thumbnail sket&h of the origins of the 'orld( The a&&ount of our planet0s gradual
emergen&e from darkness and lifelessness ties in 'ell 'ith the pi&ture from
s&ien&e$ as does the order in 'hi&h &reatures emerge(
Third$ the 6intelligent design6 !ie' held by many Christians &learly does o!erstate
the &ase( As + noted in Chapter 13$ i&k Carren0s idea that 6The uni!erse ((( is
uniquely suited for our e%isten&e$ &ustom)made 'ith the e'act spe&ifi&ations that
make human life possible6 ignores e!erything that s&ien&e has taught us about ho'
en!ironmental &hanges led to the emergen&e of Homo sapiens(
Gourth$ ho'e!er$ this does not mean that the atheists are right to treat -enesis 1 as
nonsense( The -od + kno' is the -od 'ithin the spiritual dimension$ the -od 'ho
tou&hed my heart at the moment of my &on!ersion( Gor me the question is not$
6Did that same -od &reate the entire uni!erse 13(9 billion years agoI6$ but 6Chat
does -enesis 1 mean 'hen it says that -od &reated 0the hea!ens and the earth0I6
:y ans'er to that last question is that -enesis 1 &arries the signature of -od and
so 'e return to the same question as 'ith -enesis 2)31 Did its author intend it to be
read as literally trueI And my response to the atheist !ie's noted abo!e is to make
t'o further points about -enesis 1(
Girst$ and regardless of 'ho 'rote -enesis 1$ the fa&t is that it 'as 'ritten for
people 'ho belie!ed that the 'orld had been &reated a mere 3$400 or so years
earlier( And gi!en that the Adam and ,!e story 'as ne!er intended to be seen as
literally true .e!en if -od 'as the author$ he too 'ould ha!e 'anted it to be read as
a parable/$ there is no reason to assume that -enesis 1 should be treated as literal
truth(
"e&ond$ and ha!ing a&&epted that -enesis 2)3 is a parable$ 'e &an no' read
-enesis 1 in isolation and re&ogniAe that the e!ents of the so)&alled 6si%th day6
di!ide into t'o parts1
1( -od0s &reation of the animals in -enesis 1127)24$ 'hi&h 'ill
ha!e in&luded the apes$ the earlier spe&ies in the Homo
genus and finally Homo sapiens(
2( -od0s subsequent &reation of 6man$ male and female6 in
-enesis 112;)29 by implanting Homo sapiens 'ith -od0s
image$ spe&ifi&ally gi!ing them intelle&t and souls(
The latter is the key e!ent in -enesis 1 and is$ for all pra&ti&al purposes$ the only
one that really matters( +t 'as this e!ent 'hi&h$ for the first time$ opened people0s
eyes to their surroundings( Enly then did they really see the sun$ moon and stars(
And only then$ for better or for 'orse$ did they see the possibilities for subduing
and &hanging the 'orld(
"o$ 'ith all the abo!e as ba&kground to be dra'n on &arefully if needed$ 'hat
'ould + a&tually say to an atheist 'ho asks &onfrontational questions about -od0s
role in the &reation of the uni!erseI
Girst$ + 'ould dra' a sharp line bet'een -enesis 1 and the Adam and ,!e story in
-enesis 2)3$ emphasiAing that the latter is a parable(
"e&ond$ + 'ould point out that most Christians re&ogniAe that the 6si% days6 of
-enesis 1 do not mean literally 177 hours(
Third$ + 'ould say that -enesis 1 does not pretend to gi!e a pre&isely a&&urate
a&&ount of ho' the uni!erse and our planet &ame into being( The purpose of the
rough thumbnail sket&h of e!ents 'hi&h it gi!es 'as partly to &ombat the 6&reation
myths6 of the Babylonians and others and partly to make some important points
about -od himself(
En that last point + 'ould e%plain that the Babylonians in!ested an enormous
amount of effort in studying the mo!ement of the sun$ the moon and the stars .they
sa' the planets as 6mo!ing stars6/$ belie!ing this to affe&t e!ents on our planet(
The 5e'ish priests 'ho 'rote -enesis 1 in Babylon in the ;th &entury B(C( 'ere
saying$ abo!e all$ that this 6astrology6 'as a total 'aste of time( Ce are here
be&ause -od has put us here and all the things 'e ha!e are gifts from -od1 if he
had not planted his image 'ithin us 'e 'ould not e!en kno' that 'e ha!e them(
"tars &annot speak to us$ only -od &an( And his absolute superiority o!er the stars
&an be e%pressed by saying that -od 'as there before them(
Ginally$ + 'ould say something about 'hat -enesis 111 means 'hen it says that
6-od &reated the hea!ens and the earth6 and about 'hat the -ospels mean 'hen
they say things like the follo'ing1
5ohn 11101 >e 'as in the 'orld J-reek &osmosK$ and the 'orld 'as
made through him$ yet the 'orld kne' him not(
5ohn 19141 And no'$ Gather$ glorify thou me in thy o'n presen&e
'ith the glory 'hi&h + had 'ith thee before the 'orld
J&osmosK 'as made(
-i!en that the >ebre' of -enesis uses the same 'ord for hea!en and sky$ + 'ould
e%plain that -enesis 111 is talking about the earth .thought to be flat/ and the sky
.thought to e%tend a fe' thousand feet abo!e the earth/( "o -enesis 111 is not
talking about the origins of the uni!erse and there is no reason for anyone to
asso&iate -od 'ith the 6big bang6(
And 'hen the -ospels use the term the 'orld .&osmos/$ they do not e!en mean
earth and sky( +nstead$ as the +llustrated Bible Di&tionary e%plains1
The -reek 'ord &osmos means by deri!ation ((( the uni!erse (((
But$ be&ause mankind is the most important part of the uni!erse$
the 'ord &osmos is more often used in the limited sense of human
beings ((( +t is into this 0'orld0 that men are born$ and in it they li!e
till they die .5ohn 1;121/( +t 'as all the kingdoms of this 'orld that
the de!il offered to gi!e to Christ if he 'ould 'orship him
.:atthe' 718)3/( +t 'as this 'orld$ the 'orld of men and 'omen$
of flesh and blood$ that -od lo!ed .5ohn 311;/$ and into 'hi&h
5esus &ame 'hen he 'as born of a human mother .5ohn 11129/(
J+llustrated Bible Di&tionary$ p( 1;44K
"o + 'ould further e%plain that 'hen the -ospels talk about the &reation of 6the
'orld6$ as in 5ohn 1110 and 5ohn 1914 abo!e$ they too are in fa&t referring to the
&reation of the 'orld of men and 'omen rather than to the &reation of the uni!erse(
And + 'ould add that this takes us ba&k to the same point as before( Chat makes us
6us6 is the fa&t that -od has implanted souls in ea&h of us( And that pro&ess is one
'hi&h began 'hen -od started implanting souls into the .already e%isting/ Homo
sapiens(
+ realiAe that + am &ontradi&ting @eith Card0s !ie' that 6All Christians belie!e that
-od &reated the uni!erse6 .Chapter 14/( But the Bible does not say this( And if +
seem to be bringing -od 6do'n to earth6$ then let us not forget that that is
pre&isely 'here he is1 a nanometre a'ay from the point 'here the spiritual
dimension interse&ts 'ith the four spa&e)time dimensions deep inside our minds(
:ore on this in a moment(
God's role in the origins of today's living creatures
Turning no' to atheist doubts about -od0s role in the origins of today0s li!ing
&reatures$ 'e need to &onsider t'o things( Girst$ 'hat atheists say on e!olution(
And se&ond$ 'hat they say about the origins of life itself(
Evolution
:any Christians insist that -od &reated all li!ing things e%a&tly as they are today(
They see only t'o possible e%planations$ &han&e and design$ for the amaAing
intri&a&y of e!ery li!ing &reature( And they !ery sensibly reFe&t the idea that
&han&e &ould ha!e been responsible for su&h intri&a&y(
Atheists reply by saying that$ of &ourse$ &han&e &annot e%plain matters( But they
also reFe&t the idea of design and suggest that there is in fa&t a third and infinitely
better e%planation1 e!olution(
En the basis of 'hat + said about e!olution in Chapters 10 and 11$ + 'ould make
three responses to the atheists0 !ie's here(
Girst$ that + a&&ept 'hat s&ien&e tells us about the emergen&e of Homo sapiens from
'ithin an earlier Homo spe&ies$ so + too rule out the idea that the !ery first man
'as &reated literally out of the dust of the ground( But + 'ould add the point
alluded to abo!e and in Chapter 2 that Homo sapiens did not be&ome 6us6 until
-od &reated us in his image(
"e&ond$ and 'hile + share some Christian reser!ations about the e%a&t pro&ess of
e!olution from !ery simple life forms$ that + also a&&ept the atheists0 argument that
an a&&umulation of many su&&essi!e small &hanges is a &redible e%planation for the
emergen&e ) from earlier life forms ) of the 'ide !ariety of life forms 'e see all
around us today(
Third$ ho'e!er$ that + agree 'ith all Christians that none of this is rele!ant to the
&ompletely separate question of ho' life a&tually began(
The origins of life on earth
The main questions about the origins of life on earth are 'hat happened at the
moment of the !ery first spark of life and 'here it took pla&e(
"&ientists date this e!ent at around 3(84 billion years ago and Bill Bryson sets out
the problem as follo's in A "hort >istory of 2early ,!erything1
Creating Jprimiti!eK amino a&ids Jsay$ from laboratory &hemi&alsK
is not really the problem( The problem is proteins(
?roteins are 'hat you get 'hen you string amino a&ids together (((
200 is a typi&al number of amino a&ids for a protein JandK the odds
against all 200 &oming up in a pres&ribed sequen&e are 1 in 10
2;0
(((
J,!en thenK a protein is no good to you if it &an0t reprodu&e itself$
and proteins &an0t( Gor this you need D2A ((( JButK proteins &an0t
e%ist 'ithout D2A and D2A has no purpose 'ithout proteins( Are
'e to assume$ then$ that they arose spontaneously 'ith the purpose
of supporting ea&h otherI +f so1 'o'(
And there is more still( D2A$ proteins and the other &omponents
of life &ouldn0t prosper 'ithout some sort of membrane to &ontain
them ((( it is only 'hen they &ome together 'ithin the nurturing
refuge of a &ell that these di!erse materials &an take part in the
amaAing dan&e that 'e &all life( Cithout the &ell$ they are nothing
more than interesting &hemi&als( But 'ithout the &hemi&als$ the
&ell has no purpose( As J?aulK Da!ies puts it$ 0+f e!erything needs
e!erything else$ ho' did the &ommunity of mole&ules e!er arise in
the first pla&eI0
Christians 'ould see this as fully !indi&ating the Bible0s &laim that -od 'as the
Creator of e!ery life form and of life itself and they say to anyone 'ho 'onders
ho' life began$ 6-od did it( ead -enesis 16(
Atheists reply 'ith three points( Girst$ they fully agree that the &han&es of all the
proteins et&( &oming together is !anishingly small o!er a period of$ say$ 27 hours(
But se&ond$ they note that for 40 million years or so .bet'een 3(3 and 3(84 billion
years ago/ our planet 'as a mass of &hemi&als intera&ting in all sorts of 'ays$ 'ith
no one totally able to rule out the possibility of primiti!e proteins and D2A ha!ing
emerged and then e!ol!ed during that long period( And third they say$ on the basis
of the anthropi& prin&iple$ that all the e!iden&e 'e need for seeing this as a better
e%planation than 6-od did it6 is the fa&t that 'e are all here today(
+ 'ould say t'o things in response to the atheists0 last point( Girst$ that the
anthropi& prin&iple 'as de!eloped to deal 'ith issues relating to the nature of the
uni!erse and + query its rele!an&e to the question of ho' life began on earth( And
se&ond that the argument$ 6Ce are all here today$ so (((6 is the same one that most
Christians use to ans'er the question of 'hether Adam and ,!e0s sons married
their o'n sisters .see Chapter 13/( +t e%plains nothing in either &onte%t and
suggests that both parties are approa&hing their respe&ti!e questions in the 'rong
'ay(
Any'ay$ life began 3(84 billion years ago( And as Bill Bryson 'rites1
Chate!er prompted life to begin$ it happened Fust on&e( That is the
most e%traordinary fa&t in biology$ perhaps the most e%traordinary
fa&t that 'e kno'( ,!erything that has e!er li!ed$ plant or animal$
dates its beginnings from the same primordial t'it&h(
As to 'here life began$ s&ien&e does not yet ha!e the final ans'er but Bill Bryson
notes that1
Bubbling sea !ents ((( are no' the most popular &andidates for
life0s beginnings(
"o + and probably all other Christians 'ill say1 + told you to read -enesis 1 and$ if
you had$ you 'ould ha!e started your sear&h at the bottom of the sea$ espe&ially
gi!en the &lear 'ording of -enesis111)21
+n the beginning -od &reated the hea!ens and the earth( The earth
'as 'ithout form and !oid$ and darkness 'as upon the fa&e of the
deepB and the "pirit of -od 'as mo!ing o!er the fa&e of the 'ater(
Answering the =uestion of whether God is &u! there& or &down here&
As mentioned abo!e$ atheists sometimes ridi&ule Christians o!er their inability to
de&ide 'hether -od is 6up there6 or 6do'n here6( And many sin&ere questioners
are perple%ed o!er the same point( "o let me no' e%pand on 'hat + said about the
spiritual dimension in earlier &hapters(
The 2i&ene Creed speaks of -od as the maker of 6all things !isible and in!isible6
and Da!id @onstant says in The Gaith of the Catholi& Chur&h1
Apart from the !isible uni!erse there is also an in!isible 'orld of
angels and of human souls separated from the body by death (((
A human being is a unity of body and soul( Gaith affirms that the
soul is &reated dire&tly by -od$ and is immortal(
JDa!id @onstant$ The Gaith of the Catholi& Chur&h$ p( 19K
The !ie' throughout the Bible is that$ upon death$ the soul goes initially to hades
.>ebre' sheol/1 de&isions on final destination &ome on the day of Fudgment( "o 'e
&an e%pand the diagram in Chapter 22 as follo's1
,arly Christians imagined that the hea!en in 'hi&h -od li!es$ and from 'hi&h
5esus 6&ame do'n6 .5ohn ;138/$ is some'here high up in the sky( But this !ie'
stemmed from the fa&t that$ in the -reek of 5ohn ;138 and all other rele!ant 2e'
Testament !erses$ the 'ord for 6hea!en6 is ouranos$ a term meaning both hea!en
and sky( 5esus did not$ of &ourse$ &ome do'n from the sky physi&ally1 there 'ould
then ha!e been no need for a !irgin birth( "o @onstant0s mention of an 6in!isible
'orld6 suggests that it 'as 5esus0 soul 'hi&h &ame do'n from hea!en and that
hea!en itself lies 'ithin a totally separate dimension to the physi&al ones(
By the same token 5esus did not$ at the time of his as&ension into hea!en$ rise
physi&ally into the sky( ather$ he mo!ed ba&k from the physi&al dimension to the
spiritual dimension( Bearing in mind that 5esus 'as a fugiti!e throughout his post)
resurre&tion period$ it is likely that his final appearan&e to his dis&iples took pla&e
either early in the morning or late at night( And that he 'alked off into either the
morning mist or the darkness of the night( The dis&iples 'ould ha!e stood there$
'at&hing him go$ 'alking up a steep slope on the :ount of Eli!es( And gi!en 5ohn
1;19 .6+f + do not go a'ay$ the Counsellor 'ill not &ome to you6/$ the ?ente&ost
e%perien&e 'hi&h the dis&iples under'ent a fe' days later 'ould ha!e &on!in&ed
them that 5esus had indeed returned to hea!en(
<et me gi!e three analogies( The first is that of a go!ernment minister making an
offi&ial !isit to a to'n in the ,nglish &ountryside( Ce 'ould speak of him as
6&oming do'n6 from <ondonB do'n$ that is$ to a pla&e of lo'er politi&al status(
5ust as A&ts 1411 speaks of men 6&oming do'n6 from 5udea( "o$ similarly$ 5esus0
6&oming do'n6 from hea!en meant his ha!ing arri!ed in a pla&e of lo'er status
than the hea!en that is his home(
A se&ond analogy is numbers 'hi&h$ 'hether they be 'hole numbers or fra&tions
or de&imals$ most of us see as one)dimensional1
But mathemati&ians speak also of t'o)dimensional numbers in!ol!ing multiples of
6the square root of )16 .represented by the symbol i/ and sho'n pi&torially on 'hat
are &alled 6Argand diagrams6$ for e%ample1
:al&olm <ines e%plains this in A 2umber for your Thoughts1
These t'o)dimensional numbers are usually &alled comple'
numbers in mathemati&al te%ts$ and the number 2 R 2i is said to be
made up of a 0real part0 equal to 2 and an 0imaginary part0 equal to
2i( This &hoi&e of 'ords is parti&ularly unfortunate sin&e there is
nothing in the slightest imaginary about i(
J:al&olm <ines$ A 2umber for your Thoughts$ p( 181K
Ce &an dra' a parallel bet'een the 6in!isibility6 for most people of this se&ond
dimension of numbers and the 6in!isible 'orld ((( of souls6(
Ginally$ a third analogy is string theory( >ere s&ientists 'ork 'ith 10 or 11
dimensions$ most of them 6&ur!ed up into a spa&e of !ery small siAe6 J"tephen
>a'king$ A Brief >istory of Time$ p( 1;3K( Christians may feel that hea!en must be
enormous$ but let us remember that 5esus himself in :atthe' 13131 &ompared the
kingdom of hea!en 'ith 6a mustard seed6(
Chapter !& E:p1ainin3 the Chri"tian
9e""a3e

Ce turn no' to the Chur&h0s se&ond main 21st &entury &hallenge$ that of
e%plaining the Christian message to sin&ere questioners( And + begin by quoting
:atthe' 1311;)221
And behold$ one &ame up to him$ saying$ 6Tea&her$ 'hat good
deed must + do$ to ha!e eternal lifeI6 And he said to him$ 6Chy do
you ask me about 'hat is goodI Ene there is 'ho is good( +f you
'ould enter life$ keep the &ommandments(6 >e said to him$
6Chi&hI6 And 5esus said$ 6*ou shall not kill$ *ou shall not
&ommit adultery$ *ou shall not steal$ *ou shall not bear false
'itness$ >onour your father and mother$ and *ou shall lo!e your
neighbour as yourself(6
The young man said to him$ 6All these + ha!e obser!edB 'hat do +
still la&kI6 5esus said to him$ 6+f you 'ould be perfe&t$ go$ sell
'hat you possess and gi!e to the poor$ and you 'ill ha!e treasure
in hea!enB and &ome$ follo' me(6 Chen the young man heard this
he 'ent a'ay sorro'fulB for he had great possessions(
And 5esus said to his dis&iples$ 6Truly$ + say to you$ it 'ill be hard
for a ri&h man to enter the kingdom of hea!en(6
5esus0 initial ans'er to the young man0s question &omes as a surprise to us today(
>e does not tell the man to belie!e in him$ or e!en to repent( >e simply tells him to
obey the Ten Commandments in ,%odus 20 and the <e!iti&us 13118 rule$ <o!e
your neighbour as yourself( +t is only 'hen the man presses the point that 5esus
tells him to gi!e e!erything a'ay and follo' him( :oreo!er$ 'e should not
assume that 5esus0 initial reply 'as designed as a 6lead)in6 for him to in!ite the
man to be&ome a dis&iple( The en&ounter &ame late in 5esus0 ministry by 'hi&h
time he already had all the dis&iples he needed .<uke ;113B :ark 4118)20/(
And so the final part of 5esus0 ans'er also &omes as a surprise( Ce might ha!e
e%pe&ted 5esus$ 'hen hearing that the man had li!ed a godly life thus far$ to ha!e
said$ 6+f you 'ould be perfe&t$ belie!e in me6 or 6@eep on obeying all these
&ommandmentsH6 ?erhaps 5esus realiAed that the man 'as too atta&hed to his
'ealth e!er to belie!e in him and that his possessions 'ould e!entually turn him
into the i&h Gool of <uke 12(
But the thing 'e learn from this passage is that not all non)&hur&hgoers are bent on
ridi&uling the Bible( :any of them lead li!es 'hi&h put some Christians to shame
and many of them ha!e sin&ere questions to 'hi&h$ 'hen they put them to us$ 'e
need to gi!e honest$ thoughtful ans'ers(
E*!laining the %hristian message to sincere =uestioners
1 ?eter 3114 gi!es helpful guidan&e on this !ery point1
Al'ays be prepared to make a defen&e to any one 'ho &alls you to
a&&ount for the hope that is in you$ yet do it 'ith gentleness and
re!eren&e(
i&k Carren$ in his book The ?urpose)Dri!en <ife$ says that the best 'ay to 6be
prepared to a&&ount for the hope that is in us6 is as follo's1
Crite out your testimony and then memoriAe the main points(
Di!ide it into four parts1
1( Chat my life 'as like before + met 5esus
2( >o' + realiAed + needed 5esus
3( >o' + &ommitted my life to 5esus
7( The differen&e 5esus has made in my life(
Ef &ourse$ you ha!e many other testimonies besides your sal!ation
story( *ou ha!e a story for every e%perien&e in 'hi&h -od has
helped you( *ou should make a list of all the problems$
&ir&umstan&es and &rises that -od has brought you through(
+ agree 'ith all this but$ in the &ase of some people at least$ asking about the hope
that is in us 'ill then lead on to perfe&tly sin&ere questions about our faith$ about
ho' 'e re&on&ile some of the stranger things in the Bible 'ith s&ientifi&
kno'ledge and 'ith &ommon sense( And + think that 1 ?eter 3114 is telling us to
6be prepared6 'ith ans'ers here as 'ell(
E*!laining our ho!e and faith in the conte*t of 1 Peter ,1?
:y o'n prepared .and memoriAed/ a&&ount of the hope and faith that is in me is as
follo's1
-od does not promise us life)long happiness( Chat he does
promise us is 6ha!ing life abundantly6 .5ohn 10110/ 'hi&h +
understand to mean t'o things( En the one hand$ a -od)gi!en ne'
'ay of looking at life0s problems( And on the other hand$ the
ans'er to the question$ 6Chat is the meaning of lifeI6
Chat$ then$ is the meaning of lifeI As + see it$ 'e are here be&ause
-od has put us here( 6Ce6 meaning the spiritual element 'hi&h
-od has planted in ea&h of us and through 'hi&h he no' seeks to
dra' us to himself(
-od rea&hes out to us in t'o 'ays( Through the Christian message
brought by his "on 5esus( And 'ith his o'n dire&t o!ertures$
'hereby he offers help and &omfort 'hen 'e go through times of
pain and misfortune$ and he pri&ks our &ons&ien&es and offers us
forgi!eness after 'e sin against others(
Grom -od0s perspe&ti!e$ our present li!es are designed to prepare
us for e!entual a&&eptan&e into hea!en by gi!ing us e!ery
opportunity$ both through his o'n dire&t o!ertures and through
'hate!er a&&ess 'e may ha!e to the Christian message$ to belie!e
and repent and to learn to lo!e$ trust and obey -od(
+n other 'ords$ if 'e 'ant to 6ha!e life abundantly6 on this
earth and to enter hea!en at the time of the resurre&tion of the
dead$ then 'e need to (((
Chat + say after that 'ill depend on 'hat + see as the things 'hi&h the parti&ular
person questioning me .and anyone else listening to the &on!ersation/ most needs
to hear$ 'hether about belie!ing$ repenting or learning to lo!e$ trust and obey -od(
Baith
+f + feel that the person questioning me most needs to hear about my faith$ about
'hat and 'hy + belie!e$ then + 'ill start 'ith my testimony1
+n 1393 + made a bad mistake at a hostage)taking 'hi&h almost got
a &olleague shot( This$ added to e%isting problems$ made me !ery
depressed and feeling totally lost( <ate one night$ ho'e!er$ the
thought &ame une%pe&tedly into my mind to 6ask -od for help6(
"o$ e!en though an atheist$ + offered -od a deal1 if he 'ould help
me then + 'ould follo' him fore!er( The ne%t day + 'ent to the
offi&e$ taking 'ith me 5ohn "tott0s book Basi& Christianity 'hi&h
a friend had gi!en to me years earlier but + had ne!er opened(
After the morning meeting + lo&ked myself in my offi&e and started
to read( :y initial rea&tion 'as that + &ould ne!er belie!e this
stuff$ espe&ially 'hen it started to talk about sin .a poli&e offi&er$ +
sa' myself as one of the good guys/( But + noti&ed a &hapter on the
evidence for 5esus0 resurre&tion$ so + thought + should at least read
that( And 'hen it &ame to the !erse in 5ohn 20 about the dis&iples
seeing the gra!e&lothes in the tomb and instantly belie!ing$ then +
belie!ed too1 in -od$ in 5esus and in the resurre&tion( And -od
soon helped me to see my problems in a mu&h more positi!e light(
"hould + sense that + need to say more about faith$ then + 'ill mention some of the
things + said about -od in Chapter 2$ as 'ell as some of the things + said about
5esus in Chapters 4 and 20( And if the person talking to me raises doubts about the
Adam and ,!e story then + 'ill say that it is a parable$ similar to those of 5esus$
and is not to be read as literally true(
;e!entance
+f repentan&e$ rather than faith$ seems to be key issue$ then + 'ill ask 'hether the
person questioning me is familiar 'ith the Adam and ,!e story( The ans'er 'ill of
&ourse be 6*es6$ 'hereupon + 'ill ask 'hat he or she sees as ha!ing been Adam
and ,!e0s biggest mistake( And this 'ill then probably enable me to say that the
&ouple0s real mistake 'as their failure to repent 'hen -od ga!e them the
opportunity to do so(
+ 'ill then say that 'hen people sin -od is sad$ not angry1 sad both for the sinned)
against and for the sinners( "ad be&ause of the suffering of the inFured partiesB and
sad be&ause the sinners may ne!er repent$ thus denying themsel!es all hope of
hea!en( And + shall &lose by saying that all of us ha!e hurt someone else at some
time and that repentan&e &alls simply for three things( Girst$ &onfessing matters to
-od and seeking his forgi!eness( "e&ond$ resol!ing in future to 6do unto others as
'e 'ould 'ant them to do to us6 .:atthe' 9112/( And third$ if the opportunity is
still there$ to apologiAe to ) and &ompensate ) the person 'e hurt(
<oving God
+f my questioner0s pi&ture of -od is the key issue then + 'ill say that -od is not at
all the fearsome person he is sometimes made out to be( + 'ill stress that -od lo!es
us and that 'hat he really 'ants is for us to love him( + 'ill quote 5esus0 'ords in
:atthe' 22139$ 6*ou shall lo!e the <ord your -od 'ith all your heart6$ noting that
'hen saying this 5esus 'as himself quoting Deuteronomy ;14 in the Eld
Testament( And$ if appropriate$ + 'ill add one or t'o other things mentioned in
Chapter 20(
"hould the person talking to me raise the question of the 'ay -od punished Adam
and ,!e then + 'ill stress that -enesis 2)3 is a parable$ not intended to be read as
literally true( But + 'ill add that -od0s telling the &ouple not to eat the fruit 'as for
their o'n good and that their eating it 'as be&ause they did not lo!e -od nearly as
mu&h as he lo!ed them(
Trusting God
+f + sense that trusting -od is the key issue$ then + 'ill make three points( Girst$ that
'e &an trust that -od will forgi!e us if 'e repent of our past failings( "e&ond that$
if 'e take our problems to -od in prayer$ then he will &omfort us and gi!e us a ne'
'ay of looking at matters$ often in&luding ad!i&e on ho' to o!er&ome the
problems( And third that$ if 'e do lo!e him and obey him$ then he will e!entually
a&&ept us into hea!en at the time of the resurre&tion of the dead(
0beying God
Ginally$ if my questioner0s main &on&ern seems to be that of the need to obey all
-od0s 6tiresome6 rules$ then + 'ill say that there are not that many rules and that all
the most important ones 'ere framed for our o'n benefit( + 'ill add that$ 'ith
some of the rules in the Eld Testament apparently laid do'n by human Fudges
rather than by -od himself$ the Christian looks primarily at 'hat 5esus says in the
-ospels and$ abo!e all$ in the useful &he&k)list in the "ermon on the :ount in
:atthe' 4)9(
En the Ten Commandments$ + 'ill say that 5esus reiterates them in :atthe' 4 and
else'here$ stressing that the spirit and the letter of these &ommandments are
equally important( Thus being angry 'ith someone already brea&hes the ;th
&ommandment .*ou shall not kill/$ looking lustfully at another 'oman already
brea&hes the 9th &ommandment .*ou shall not &ommit adultery/ and refusing a
loan 'e &an afford to gi!e to a needy person brea&hes the 8th &ommandment .*ou
shall not steal/( ,!en the Chur&h admits that these are 6hard sayings6 but no one
&an deny that they set before us an ideal 'hi&h is &ertainly 'orth trying to li!e up
to(
But + 'ill also say that there are other rules else'here in :atthe' 4)9 'hi&h are in
no 'ay hard sayings and 'hi&h 'e should definitely obey( ules like 6Do unto
others as you 'ould 'ant them to do to you6 .:atthe' 9112/ and three &ommands
'hi&h$ Christians or other'ise$ 'e really do ignore at our peril( Girst$ lo!e your
enemies .:atthe' 4177)7;/( "e&ond$ forgi!e others .:atthe' ;117)14/( And third$
do not Fudge others .:atthe' 911)2/( ,!en &ommon sense tells us that hanging on
to hatred and unforgi!eness ser!es no useful purpose and damages our physi&al
and mental health( And 5esus adds to this the further point that disobeying any of
these &ommands 'ill see us e%&luded from hea!en(
+f the person talking to me raises the question of the Adam and ,!e story then +
'ill say that the story is a parable( But + 'ill add that$ e!en if it is read as literally
true$ the &ouple had so many other things to eat that the rule not to eat the
forbidden fruit 'as surely the 6easiest saying6 of all(
An evangelical a!!roach to e*!laining the %hristian message
+ &annot lea!e this subFe&t 'ithout saying something about the approa&h 'hi&h
e!angeli&al Christians take hereB after all$ + be&ame a Christian largely through
reading 5ohn "tott0s book Basi& Christianity(
The opening &hapter of "tott0s book is entitled 6The ight Approa&h6 and makes
the point that 6-od is seeking us and 'e must seek him6( And "tott0s ad!i&e to
anyone 'ho &omes 'ith sin&ere questions is that 'e must seek -od 6diligently$
humbly$ honestly and obediently6( >e 'rites1
Be open to the possibility that ((( Christ may in fa&t be true( And if
you 'ant to be a humble$ honest$ obedient seeker after -od$ &ome
to the book 'hi&h &laims to be his re!elation( Come parti&ularly to
the -ospels 'hi&h tell the story of 5esus Christ( -i!e him a &han&e
to &onfront you 'ith himself and to authenti&ate himself to you(
Come 'ith the full &onsent of your mind and 'ill$ ready to belie!e
and obey if -od brings &on!i&tion to you( Chy not read through
the -ospel of :ark$ or 5ohnI ((( *ou &ould read either through at a
sitting .preferably in a modern translation/$ to let it make its total
impa&t on you( Then you &ould re)read it slo'ly$ a &hapter a day(
Before you read$ pray ) perhaps something like this1
'/od, if you e'ist 0and 1 don't &now if you do2, and if you
can hear this prayer 0and 1 don't &now if you can2, 1 want to
tell you that 1 am an honest see&er after the truth. !how me
if 3esus is your !on and the !aviour of the world. $nd if you
bring conviction to my mind, 1 will trust him as my !aviour
and follow him as my 4ord.'
2o)one &an pray su&h a prayer and be disappointed( -od is no
man0s debtor( >e honours all honest sear&h( >e re'ards all honest
seekers( Christ0s promise is plain1 0"eek and you 'ill find(0
This approa&h is &learly tried and tested and + make only t'o &omments(
Girst$ "tott suggests that the main obsta&les to a person0s seeking -od are
6intelle&tual preFudi&e and moral self)'ill6( >e 'rites1
Ce kno' that to find -od and to a&&ept 5esus Christ 'ould be a
!ery in&on!enient e%perien&e( +t 'ould in!ol!e the rethinking of
our 'hole outlook on life and the readFustment of our 'hole
manner of life( And it is a &ombination of intelle&tual and moral
&o'ardi&e 'hi&h makes us hesitate(
But in my e%perien&e$ mis&on&eptions about the Adam and ,!e story and abo!e all
its apparent pi&ture of a harsh and unfair -od are also often a fa&tor$ espe&ially
'ith people unfamiliar 'ith anything else in the Bible( And these mis&on&eptions
need to be &orre&ted before these people are going to sit do'n and 'ade their 'ay
through either :ark or 5ohn(
"e&ond$ finding -od and a&&epting 5esus is only the start of a long Fourney( And
some Christians .the subFe&t of the ne%t &hapter/ be&ome 6lost sheep6 along the
'ay( 2ot physi&ally lost ) they are in &hur&h e!ery "unday ) but lost be&ause$ after
reading :ark and 5ohn$ they then read -enesis and fall foul of their o'n sets of
mis&on&eptions about the Adam and ,!e story and about our 'onderful lo!ing and
forgi!ing -od(
Chapter !. 5ettin3 the Adam and Eve 9e""a3e
o(t to Chri"tian"
The ne%t &hallenge fa&ing the Chur&h in the 21st &entury is getting the true
message of the Adam and ,!e story out to Christians( Ef &ourse there are risks in
qui&kly embra&ing ne' ideas about any passage in the Bible( But the Adam and
,!e story is not Fust 6any6 passage( +t is one of fe' passages in the Bible 'ith
'hi&h e!ery Christian$ young or old$ is fully familiar and is &ertainly the passage
from 'hi&h most Christians dra' their abiding pi&ture of -od(
+n this &hapter + shall therefore look first at t'o groups of Christians 'ho ha!e
de!eloped &ompletely the 'rong pi&ture of -od$ mainly through reading the Adam
and ,!e story as literally true( Then$ + shall look at ho' "unday s&hools tea&h the
story to young &hildren( And finally + shall look at the role that Bibles &an and do
play in influen&ing thinking about the story$ for 'orse at present but hopefully for
better in the future(
%hristians with com!letely the wrong !icture of God
:ost Christians kno' that -od has &alled them and has taught them to lo!e and
trust him( They kno' that o&&asional t'inges of &ons&ien&e are -od)gi!en
reminders that he really does 'ant them to li!e up to his standards( They kno' that
misfortunes$ e!en those &oin&identally follo'ing their ha!ing sinned$ are not
punishments from -od but are merely haAards of life and 6the &rosses they ha!e to
bear6( And they obey the !arious rules laid do'n in the Ten Commandments
mainly be&ause they 'ould ne!er dream of breaking them(
But some Christians are !ery different from this and there are t'o types of
Christians 'ho badly need to kno' the truth about the Adam and ,!e story and to
be 6put straight6 about their pi&ture of -od( Girst$ those 'ho fear -od be&ause of
'hat they read about him in the story( And se&ond$ those 'ho re!el in a -od 'ho
supposedly 6punishes the 'i&ked6(
%hristians who fear God
The first group of Christians are those 'ho ha!e a real problem 'ith lo!ing and
trusting -od be&ause they fear him(
+n saying in :atthe' 22139$ 6*ou shall lo!e the <ord your -od 'ith all your
heart6$ 5esus 'as quoting Deuteronomy ;14 'hi&h itself stands in &ontrast 'ith
Deuteronomy 4123 'here -od supposedly 'ishes his people 6'ould fear me and
keep all my &ommandments6( +n effe&t$ then$ 5esus 'as &ommenting on ) and
indeed reFe&ting ) the Deuteronomy idea that -od 'ants his people both to fear
him and to lo!e him(
And here lies the reason 'hy 'e need to learn to lo!e -od( ,arly on in our
Christian life$ 'hen 'e are only too happy to belie!e 'hate!er the Chur&h tea&hes
us$ 'e readily a&&ept the Eld Testament idea that -od really is to be lo!ed and
feared( ,!en though$ as the !erse 1 5ohn 7118 .?erfe&t lo!e &asts out fear/ ser!es
only to underline$ it is in fa&t impossible to lo!e and fear anyone at the same time(
"o learning to lo!e -od means &oming to realiAe t'o things( Girst$ that the Eld
Testament idea of a -od to be lo!ed and feared is 'rong( And se&ond$ that 5esus0
pi&ture of -od in the -ospels is the &orre&t one1 that of an e%&lusi!ely lo!ing
Gather -od 'ho simply 'ants us to lo!e him(
A further problem for these parti&ular Christians is that some of them are misled by
>ebre's 1012;)291
+f 'e sin deliberately after re&ei!ing the kno'ledge of the truth$
there no longer remains a sa&rifi&e for sins$ but a fearful prospe&t
of Fudgment$ and a fury of fire 'hi&h 'ill &onsume the ad!ersaries(
At the start of our Christian life 'e imagine that 'e 'ill ne!er again ha!e to go to
-od in repentan&e( And if 'e sin after &on!ersion$ 'e may be afraid that 'e 'ill
not get a 6se&ond &han&e6 from -od(
But the truth$ gi!en that 6the flesh is 'eak6 .:atthe' 2;171/$ is that most if not all
Christians sin after &on!ersion( And that$ as 1 5ohn 118)3 says1
+f 'e say 'e ha!e no sin$ 'e de&ei!e oursel!es$ and the truth is not
in us( +f 'e &onfess our sins$ he is faithful and Fust$ and 'ill
forgi!e our sins and &leanse us from all unrighteousness(
+t may be hard to admit to -od and to oursel!es that 'e ha!e failed to &hange our
'ays sin&e the time 'e first re&ogniAed our sinfulness and that 'e ha!e let him
do'n badly( "o if this further repentan&e is sin&ere then 'e 'ill probably shed
e!en more tears than 'hen 'e first &onfessed our sins( But 'e ha!e 5esus0 'ords in
<uke 1419 to en&ourage us1
There 'ill be more Foy in hea!en o!er one sinner 'ho repents than
o!er ninety)nine righteous people 'ho need no repentan&e(
En the question of learning to trust -od$ 'e need to make the most of t'o
promises 'hi&h 5esus brought( Girst$ freedom from fear and an%iety1
:atthe' ;124)331 Do not be an%ious about your life$ 'hat you
shall eat or 'hat you shall drink$ nor about your body$ 'hat
you shall put on ((( "eek first his kingdom and his
righteousness$ and all these things shall be yours as 'ell(
5ohn 171291 ?ea&e + lea!e 'ith youB my pea&e + gi!e to youB not as
the 'orld gi!es do + gi!e to you( <et not your hearts be
troubled$ neither let them be afraid(
And se&ond$ the promise of help and &omfort in times of diffi&ulty1
:atthe' 9191 Ask$ and it 'ill be gi!en youB seek$ and you 'ill
findB kno&k$ and it 'ill be opened to you(
:atthe' 111281 Come to me$ all 'ho labour and are hea!y laden$
and + 'ill gi!e you rest(
+f 'e do not ask for -od0s help$ 'e &annot e%pe&t anything from him( But if 'e do
ask ) if 'e take our problems to him in prayer ) then 'e &an trust -od to respond in
one of t'o 'ays1 either taking the problems a'ay entirely or$ at the !ery least$
making them a lot easier to li!e 'ith by &omforting us and by gi!ing us a ne' 'ay
of looking at matters(
*et e!en a minor problem &an shake some Christians0 trust in -od( At the start of
our Christian life 'e imagine that -od 'ill immediately take a'ay any
misfortunes that may &ome along( And if$ later$ 'e ha!e a sudden problem and
urgent prayer fails to 6mo!e the mountain6$ 'e may begin to doubt that -od
ans'ers prayers( Er 'e may think that our faith is not strong enough to 6mo!e6
-od( Er 'e may imagine$ in line 'ith 'hat i&k Carren said in Chapter 13$ that
the problem has been &aused or 6allo'ed6 by -od to test us( +n fa&t$ ho'e!er$
misfortunes are simply a haAard of life 'hi&h 'e all ha!e to fa&e sooner or later( "o
the issue of trust is really one of 'hat 'e e%pe&t from -od( 5esus does not promise
us trouble)free li!es and 'e &annot e%pe&t -od to shield us from all misfortunes1
no one &an e%pe&t to a!oid e!entual deathH
"o 'hat do these Christians need to be told about the Adam and ,!e storyI Three
things seem parti&ularly important(
Girst$ that the story is a parable$ on a par 'ith those of 5esus$ and so is not literally
true( The point of the story is not that 'e should fear -od$ but that 'e should$ for
our o'n good$ pay &lose attention to 'hat he says to us both in the Bible and in
any ad!i&e he gi!es us 'hen 'e pray to him(
"e&ond$ that the story also makes the point that$ 'hile -od 'ill al'ays forgi!e our
sins if 'e e!entually repent sin&erely .1 5ohn 118)3/$ it makes good sense to
&onfess e!ery sin to -od at the earliest opportunity(
Third that$ 'ith the Adam and ,!e story no' properly understood$ the 'ay
be&omes open to reading the entire Bible in the light of the mu&h more positi!e
pi&ture of -od 'hi&h 5esus gi!es in the -ospels$ namely that of a lo!ing and
forgi!ing Gather -od(
%hristians who revel in a God who su!!osedly &!unishes the wicked&
There is also a se&ond group of Christians 'ho need to be 6put straight6 in relation
to their understanding of -od( Typi&ally$ these people see themsel!es as guaranteed
pla&es in hea!en$ !ie' the Adam and ,!e story as literally true in e!ery respe&t
and re!el in the pi&ture of -od punishing 6the 'i&ked6 'hi&h this !ie'point
en&ourages( They ignore the ad!i&e in 1 ?eter 3114 to 6a&&ount for the hope that is
in you ((( 'ith gentleness and re!eren&e6( And they endanger their o'n sal!ation in
t'o 'ays(
Girst$ these Christians often imagine that their initial repentan&e$ at the time of their
&on!ersion has &o!ered them for life1 that their subsequent misdeeds are not
6deliberate sins6 .in terms of >ebre's 1012;)29 abo!e/ and so are automati&ally
forgi!en 'ith no need for further repentan&e( And as a result they blo&k out all
-od0s efforts to pri&k their &ons&ien&es and these misdeeds go un&onfessed and
unforgi!en(
"e&ond$ many of these Christians disobey 5esus0 &ommand not to Fudge others and
defend doing so in t'o 'ays( They say that the Bible is full of people ) priests$
prophets and apostles ) 'ho 'ent around &ondemning people for their sinsB and
that they are follo'ing their e%amples( And they say that they are obeying the
&ommand to be the salt and light of the 'orld .:atthe' 4113)1;/1 that they are
simply edu&ating so&iety in 'hat -od sets out in the Bible as being the &orre&t 'ay
to lead godly li!es(
5esus0 reply to all of this is his parable of the ?harisee and the Ta% Colle&tor in
<uke 1813)17$ 'here he 'arns of the danger of 6trusting in one0s o'n
righteousness and despising others6( And this is pre&isely the message 'hi&h the
Chur&h needs to get a&ross to these Christians today(
"o 'hat do these Christians need to be told about the Adam and ,!e storyI >ere
t'o things seem important(
Girst$ that the story is a parable$ on a par 'ith those of 5esus$ and so is not literally
true( A&&ordingly$ it is totally 'rong for them to re!el in the idea of a harsh
punishing -od( And doubly 'rong for them to mislead people into thinking that
-od is someone 'ho should be feared(
"e&ond$ that &ondemning people for their 6'i&kedness6 is itself a sin and most
&ertainly not one 'hi&h is 6&o!ered6 by our initial repentan&e( A&&ordingly they
need to repent of it now$ before it be&omes too late(
Teaching the Adam and Eve story to children
+n &ase you are unfamiliar 'ith the 'ay "unday s&hools tea&h the Adam and ,!e
story to their &hildren$ let me quote in full the &hild)friendly 6Adam and ,!e in the
-arden of ,den6 lesson plan at dltk)bible(&om1
-od took some &lay from the ground and made the shape of a man(
Then >e breathed gently into the shape( The man0s eyes opened
and he began to li!e( -od &alled him Adam(
The <ord made a beautiful garden for him to li!e in( The garden$
&alled ,den$ 'as full of many 'onderful things( Beautiful flo'ers
gre' e!ery'here( Birds sang in the trees$ streams flo'ed through
the !alley and animals roamed a&ross the fields(
-od had made the man in >is image to keep >im &ompany and
look after the 'orld(
-od brought all the animals to Adam one at a time to be gi!en
their names( 6,lephant6$ he 'ould say$ or 6Tiger6$ or 6?or&upine6(
But -od felt sorry for Adam( 62one of these animals is really like
him$6 thought -od$ 6he needs someone to share his life( "omeone
'ho &ares for him and 'ho he &an &are for(6
That night$ -od took a rib from Adam0s side and made a 'oman(
Chen Adam a'oke the follo'ing morning$ he found a 'ife$ ,!e$
lying asleep beside him( Adam 'as so happy( >e took her hand
and she 'oke up( "he looked up at him and smiled(
-od told the man and 'oman that it 'as their Fob to take &are of
their ne' home( -od blessed them$ saying$ 6All this is for you(
>elp yourself to anything you like( But ne!er tou&h the tree in the
middle of the -arden( That tree gi!es kno'ledge of good and e!il(
The day you eat its fruit$ you 'ill die(6
-od did not mean that Adam and ,!e 'ould drop do'n dead the
moment they ate the fruit from the tree( >e meant that in time they
'ould die 'ithout >is "pirit d'elling in them(
Ene day$ ,!e 'as gathering berries for dinner 'hen she heard a
silky !oi&e behind her(
6>as -od told you that you &an eat the fruit from all the treesI6 the
!oi&e asked softly( ,!e turned around to see a snake talking to her(
6-od has told us 'e &an eat all the fruit e%&ept for 'hat gro's on
The Tree of the @no'ledge of -ood and ,!il$6 ,!e told the
serpent(
6Eh &ome no'$ that0s sillyH + hardly think su&h a lo!ely fruit 'ould
do you any harm$6 the serpent lied( 6-od kno's that if you eat
from The Tree of the @no'ledge of -ood and ,!il you0ll be&ome
Fust like -od$ and 'ill be able to de&ide for yourself 'hat is right
and 'hat is 'rong(6
The 'oman looked at the fruit and thought ho' tasty it looked(
"he thought ho' 'onderful it 'ould be to be as 'ise and po'erful
as -od( "he belie!ed the serpent0s lie and ate the fruit(
"he felt a strange feeling in the pit of her stoma&h( "he fidgeted
and 'ondered 'hat 'as 'rong 'ith her( "uddenly she realiAed
that she 'as feeling guilty )) she had disobeyed -od and kne'
she0d done something 'rong(
,!e hurriedly pi&ked some more fruit and took it ba&k to Adam(
They ate the fruit and sat in gloomy silen&e( As soon as they ate
the fruit a &hange &ame o!er Adam and ,!e( They be&ame
unhappy and fearful of -od(
Adam and ,!e heard -od &alling them( Cithout thinking$ they
di!ed into the bushes$ but -od kne' 'here they 'ere( Chen -od
asked them if they had eaten from The Tree of the @no'ledge of
-ood and ,!il that >e had told them not to tou&h$ they blamed
ea&h other for their sins(
-od 'as sad that Adam and ,!e had disobeyed >im( >e told them
that they had to lea!e the -arden of ,den$ 6Grom no' on you0ll
ha!e to s&rat&h a li!ing from the soil( *ou0ll need to make &lothes
and gro' food( 2othing 'ill &ome easily )) not e!en &hildbirth(
And one day$ you 'ill die(6
There is of &ourse a great deal of adult subtlety here( En the one hand$ the pi&ture
of -od in -enesis 2)3 is &arefully blurred$ 'ith the deliberate playing)do'n of the
punishment meted out to Adam and ,!e( And it is doubtless right that young
&hildren should be en&ouraged to &on&entrate on the positi!e side of the story$ that
-od is a lo!ing Gather 'ho ga!e Adam and ,!e e!erything they &ould possibly
'ant and that the &ouple0s later misfortunes 'ere entirely of their o'n making(
En the other hand$ ho'e!er$ the &hildren are being led to see -enesis 2)3 as
literally true rather than as a parable( Gor many of the &hildren$ this 'ill ne!er be a
problem( But some 'ill be&ome the sort of Christians dis&ussed abo!e$ 'hose li!es
and ministries 'ill be permanently blighted by the &ompletely 'rong pi&ture of
-od the story has gi!en them( And others 'ill e!entually realiAe that mention of a
talking snake and so on &annot possibly be fa&tual and 'ill turn a'ay from -od
fore!er(
Cith s&ien&e getting e!er &loser during the 21st &entury to the full story about the
origins of mankind$ the Chur&h needs to start no' 'orking out 'ays to present the
Adam and ,!e story in its true light instead of in the fan&iful 'ay it is being taught
to &hildren at present(
The role that $ibles !lay
The final aspe&t of the &hallenge in getting the true message of the Adam and ,!e
story out to Christians &on&erns the role that Bibles play( There are t'o issues here(
Girst$ that publishers of Bibles do little to help anyone understand 'hat they are
reading( And se&ond$ that some re&ent ,nglish translations of the Bible a&tually
obstru&t proper understanding(
+n terms of helping readers to understand key passages$ 'e &an di!ide Bibles into
t'o types( Those 'hi&h gi!e simply the bare te%t( And those 'ith detailed notes
designed for people preparing sermons or material for study groups( +n neither &ase
is any help gi!en to the ordinary reader of -enesis 2)3$ 'ho realiAes that there is
more to matters than meets the eye but learns nothing from being told that
bdellium is an aromati& gum(
Ef &ourse there are a fe' glorious e%&eptions( The "tudy ,dition of the 2e'
5erusalem Bible gi!es an e%tremely helpful 6+ntrodu&tion to the ?entateu&h6$
e%plaining all about J$ E$ D and P( And one of my Gren&h Bibles$ <A B+B<,$
Vdition &ondensWe de "Wle&tion du eader0s Digest$ pro!ides a !ery useful
e%planatory bo% alongside the te%t of -enesis 2)3(
The ,nglish language Bible publishing &ommunity 'ould do 'ell to follo' the
Gren&h e%ample$ perhaps 'ith a bo% 'orded roughly1
The story of Adam and ,!e in -enesis 2)3 presents them as the
!ery first man and 'oman 'ho disobey a simple &ommand from
-od ) not to eat the 6forbidden fruit6 ) and are then punished(
Certainly the story itself is !ery old( But s&holars ha!e sho'n that
-enesis 'as not put into its present form until the 4th &entury B(C(
and se!eral features of the te%t of -enesis 2)3 suggest that &hanges
'ere made to the story at that time(
A&&ordingly$ there are three 'ays of reading the a&&ount1 as literal
truth$ as poetry or as a parable similar to those of 5esus( And$ if
read as a parable$ its main message for us today is that Adam and
,!e0s greatest mistake 'as their blaming e!eryone but themsel!es
after they sinned$ instead of humbly asking -od to forgi!e them(
But the main problem 'ith ,nglish language !ersions of the Bible today is that
some re&ent translations are at times misleading(
Appendi% 3 of i&k Carren0s The ?urpose)Dri!en <ife reads as follo's1
This book &ontains nearly a thousand quotations from "&ripture(
+ ha!e intentionally !aried the Bible translations used for t'o
important reasons( Girst$ no matter ho' 'onderful a translation
is$ it has its limitations( The Bible 'as originally 'ritten using
11$280 >ebre'$ Aramai& and -reek 'ords$ but the typi&al ,nglish
translation uses only around ;$000 'ords( Eb!iously$ nuan&es and
shades of meaning &an be lost$ so it is al'ays helpful to &ompare
translations(
"e&ond$ and e!en more important$ is the fa&t that 'e often miss the
full impa&t of familiar Bible !erses$ not be&ause of poor
translation$ but simply be&ause they ha!e be&ome so familiarH Ce
thin& 'e kno' 'hat a !erse says be&ause 'e ha!e read it or heard
it so many times( Then 'hen 'e find it quoted in a book$ 'e skim
o!er it and miss the full meaning( Therefore + ha!e deliberately
used paraphrases to help you see -od0s truth in ne'$ fresh 'ays(
Carren ob!iously makes some good points here( But + feel sorry for all the
medie!al s&ribes 'ho took great &are to ensure that e!ery single letter of the
original >ebre' and -reek 'as faithfully transmitted$ only for some modern day
British and Ameri&an translators to &ome along and &hange the entire meaning by
supposedly bringing out hidden nuan&es(
+n the spe&ifi& &ase of the Adam and ,!e story it espe&ially 'orries me that$ as +
mentioned in Chapter 3$ the 2e' +nternational #ersion &hanges the 'ording of the
!erse -enesis 2113 from

"o out of the ground the <ED -od formed e!ery beast of the
field and e!ery bird of the air$ and brought them to the man to see
'hat he 'ould &all themB and 'hate!er the man &alled e!ery li!ing
&reature$ that 'as its name( Je!ised "tandard #ersionK
into the subtly different

2o' the <ED -od had formed out of the ground all the 'ild
animals and all the birds in the sky( >e brought them to the man to
see 'hat he 'ould name them( And 'hate!er the man &alled ea&h
li!ing &reature$ that 'as its name( J2e' +nternational #ersionK
There are only t'o ob!ious e%planations for the &hange here( ,ither there 'as a
problem 'ith either the original >ebre' or 'ith the e!ised "tandard #ersion0s
rendering .unlikely$ gi!en 'hat 'e find at 'ebsites gi!ing interlinear translations/(
Er the ,nglish translation has been deliberately altered to blur the &ontradi&tion
bet'een the orders of e!ents in Creation in -enesis 1 and -enesis 2$ to support the
&laim that Adam and ,!e are identi&al to the 6man$ male and female6 in -enesis 1
and to en&ourage e!eryone to read the Adam and ,!e story as stri&t literal truth(
+f that se&ond e%planation is the right one$ then the issue be&omes that of Bible
publishers deliberately misrepresenting 6the Cord of -od6$ a matter 'hi&h the
Chur&h needs to address 'ith some urgen&y(
Chapter !0 Practica1 Cha11en3e" Faced ) the
Ch(rch Toda

The 21st &entury Chur&h also fa&es a number of pra&ti&al &hallenges related in
some 'ay or other to the Adam and ,!e story( + shall in this &hapter deal in turn
'ith the issues of abortion$ 'omen priests and bishops$ homose%uality$ gay
bishops and same)se% marriage(
Abortion
Christians usually take one of three !ie's on abortion(
"ome Christians$ espe&ially those in!ol!ed in &ounselling young girls for 'hom an
un'anted pregnan&y is an o!er'helming disaster$ empathiAe 'ith the 'oman(
+nstead of Fudging her after she says she 'ants to ha!e an abortion$ they gently
en&ourage her to take the pregnan&y to term and offer help to enable her to do this(
And they also en&ourage her or her family to 6keep6 the baby$ or help arrange for
the baby to be adopted(
:ost Christians$ on the other hand$ take the !ie' that -od plants a soul in e!ery
embryo at the moment of &on&eption( En this basis they see e!ery abortion$ e!en
one 'here the pregnan&y 'as &aused by the 'oman0s ha!ing been raped$ as killing
a human being and thus as a brea&h of the ;th &ommandment$ 6*ou shall not kill6(
And finally a fe' Christians take an e%tremely hard line on abortion( They see
un'anted pregnan&y as the pri&e 'hi&h immoral 'omen pay for ha!ing had illi&it
se%( They see abortion as these 'omen0s &ompounding their first sin by the further
one of a!oiding the greatly multiplied pain in &hildbearing 'hi&h -od pres&ribed
at the time of ,!e( And for these Christians the pi&ture is that of 'i&ked people
.'omen and do&tors in abortion &lini&s/ gleefully undoing -od0s 'ork and of a
-od 'ho is for&ed to stand by and 'at&h murder unfold on an industrial s&ale(
2o' + do not defend abortion( >a!ing been put into an orphanage immediately
after + 'as born in 1373$ + kno' that + 'ould not be here today if abortion had been
legal in Britain at that time( But + do 'ant to defend three of the 6players6 in the
abortion issue( Girst -od himself$ 'hom + see as misrepresented here( "e&ond$
those 'omen 'ho did not &onsent to the se%ual a&t 'hi&h brought about their
pregnan&y( And third$ the &riminal la' 'hi&h is a !ital part of human so&iety0s
foundations(
Girst$ -od himself( + feel that many Christians dra' their thinking here partly from
the Adam and ,!e story( eading the story as literally true$ they see -od as ha!ing
&reated a perfe&t 6man$ male and female6 only for the snake to &ome along and
undo his 'ork$ obliging him thereafter to stand po'erless as he 'at&hed mankind
&ommit sin$ sin and more sin(
:y response to this is that it is the 'rong 'ay to read the Adam and ,!e story and
is absolutely the 'rong 'ay to pi&ture -od( Ce dismiss no' the medie!al idea of
6the limbo of infants61 the pla&e 'here dead infants 'ent to spend eternity( And yet
'e imagine that -od today is po'erless to the point 'here he &annot res&ue a soul
from an aborted foetus and gi!e it a fresh &han&e of sal!ation by implanting it in
another foetus(
"e&ond$ the 'omen( Cith a 'ide range of abortions up to the 27th 'eek of
pregnan&y no' de&riminaliAed$ the question is 'hether these abortions should still
be seen as sins( And to set the s&ene here$ 'e must first look at 'hat 5esus says
about adultery in :ark 101;)12 and :atthe' 41321
Grom the beginning of &reation$ 0-od made them male and female(0
0Gor this reason a man shall lea!e his father and mother and be
Foined to his 'ife$ and the t'o shall be&ome one flesh(0 ((( Chat
therefore -od has Foined together$ let not man put asunder (((
Choe!er di!or&es his 'ife and marries another$ &ommits adultery
against herB and if she di!or&es her husband and marries another$
she &ommits adultery(
,!ery one 'ho di!or&es his 'ife$ e%&ept on grounds of un&hastity$
makes her an adulteressB and 'hoe!er marries a di!or&ed 'oman
&ommits adultery(
5ohn "tott &omments in +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today1
1( A man 'ho di!or&es his 'ife$ and then remarries$ both
&ommits adultery himself and$ be&ause it is assumed that his
di!or&ed 'ife 'ill also remarry$ &auses her to &ommit
adultery as 'ell ((( Gurther$ a man 'ho marries a di!or&ee
&ommits adultery(
2( The only remarriage after di!or&e 'hi&h is not tantamount
to adultery is that of an inno&ent person 'hose partner has
been se%ually unfaithful$ for in this &ase the infidelity has
already been &ommitted by the guilty partner(
J5ohn "tott$ +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ pp( 391$393K
+ dra' t'o &on&lusions from this( +n "tott0s first s&enario$ and 'hile all three
adulteries ) the man0s$ his former 'ife0s and her se&ond husband0s ) are sins$ the
sole sinner is in e!ery &ase the original husband 'ho is 6!i&ariously6 liable for
e!erything that stems from his di!or&e( And in "tott0s se&ond s&enario$ the
responsibility for the 6putting asunder6 of the original marriage rests solely on the
shoulders of the unfaithful 'ife(
-i!en 'hat the ;th Commandment says .6*ou shall not kill6/$ abortion is again
al'ays a sinB the only e%&eption 'ould be if the pregnant 'oman0s o'n life 'ould
be endangered if her pregnan&y 'ere not terminated( But the !ie' Fust dra'n from
'hat 5esus says about adultery should surely apply here as 'ell( +f a 'oman is
raped and be&omes pregnant then she has e!ery right to opt for an abortion1 the
responsibility for the sin rests solely on the shoulders of the man 'ho raped her(
"imilarly$ if a girl under 1; be&omes pregnant then$ as the victim of a &riminal
offen&e under the "e%ual Effen&es A&t 2003$ she too has e!ery right to opt for an
abortion1 on&e again$ the sin rests 'ith the &riminal in!ol!ed(
A last point to mention briefly here is something 'ritten by ?rofessor 5ohn Cyatt
in a spe&ially &ontributed &hapter in 5ohn "tott0s +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today(
Cyatt 'rites1
+n +ndia$ pregnant 'omen are often for&ed by relati!es to undergo
antenatal tests ((( to identify the se% of their fetus( +f it is found to
be female$ an abortion is performed( A report in the 5ritish
6edical 3ournal estimated that at least 40$000 female fetuses per
year 'ere aborted in +ndia for this reason ((( Although legislation
has been passed in the +ndian parliament to outla' the pra&ti&e$ it
is diffi&ult if not impossible for the go!ernment to &ontrol(
J+ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ pp( 721)722K
>ere the sole sinners are of &ourse the unspeakably &allous relati!es(
Third$ the la'( 2o one should be fully happy 'ith la's 'hi&h in pra&ti&e enable
any 'oman to 6demand6 an abortion up to the 27th 'eek of pregnan&y( Gor one
thing$ they allo' a 'oman 'ho gro's tired of her husband to end$ 'hether he likes
it or not$ 'hat .under the 6one flesh6 prin&iple/ is their pregnan&y( And Christians
are &orre&t to point out that the unborn &hild has human rights as 'ell( But 'here
many Christians are 'rong is that they fail to realiAe that the Eld Testament
approa&h to pre)marital pregnan&ies 'as to make abortion unne&essary by for&ing
the man in!ol!ed to li!e up to his responsibilities$ as in ,%odus 2211;)191
+f a man sedu&es a !irgin 'ho is not betrothed$ and lies 'ith her$
he shall gi!e the marriage present for her$ and make her his 'ife( +f
the father utterly refuses to gi!e her to him$ he shall pay the money
equi!alent to the marriage present for !irgins(
+n my !ie'$ therefore$ Christians upset o!er abortion should do t'o things( They
should &ampaign for tougher enfor&ement of the pro!isions of the "e%ual Effen&es
A&t 2003( And abo!e all$ they should support Christian &harities pro!iding
&ounselling and adoption ser!i&es(
'omen !riests and bisho!s
+ mentioned in some detail in Chapter 17 5ohn "tott0s !ie's in +ssues Ga&ing
Christians Today on the question of ?aul0s do&trine of 6male headship6$ in&luding
"tott0s &on&lusions that1
J?aul0s !ie'sK$ refle&ting the fa&ts of our human &reation ((( are not
affe&ted by the fashions of a passing &ulture(
>eadship implies some degree of leadership$ 'hi&h$ ho'e!er$ is
best e%pressed in terms not of 6authority6 but of 6responsibility6(
J5ohn "tott$ +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ pp( 370$373)377K
This leads up to 'hat "tott 'ants to say about the impli&ations of male headship
for the role of 'omen in ministry( >e 'rites1
That 'omen are &alled by -od to ministry hardly needs any
demonstration( 6:inistry6 is 6ser!i&e6 .dia&onia/$ and e!ery
Christian$ male and female$ young and old$ is &alled to follo' in
the footsteps of him 'ho said he had not &ome to be ser!ed but to
ser!e .:ark 10174/( The only question is 'hat form 'omen0s
ministry should take$ 'hether any limits should be pla&ed on it$
and in parti&ular 'hether 'omen should be ordained (((
"ome Christians$ an%ious to think and a&t bibli&ally$ 'ill
immediately say that the ordination of 'omen is inadmissible( 2ot
only 'ere all the apostles and the presbyters of 2e' Testament
times men$ but the spe&ifi& instru&tions that 'omen must be 6silent
in the &hur&hes6 and 6not tea&h or ha!e authority o!er men6 .1
Corinthians 17137B 1 Timothy 2112/ settle the matter(
That is only one side of the argument$ ho'e!er( En the other side$
a strong prima fa&ie bibli&al &ase &an be made for a&ti!e female
leadership in the &hur&h$ in&luding a tea&hing ministry (((
+ belie!e that there are situations in 'hi&h it is entirely proper for
'omen to tea&h$ and to tea&h men$ pro!ided that ((( the &ontent of
their tea&hing is bibli&al$ its &onte%t a team and its style humble
.yet these are also important for men/( +n su&h a situation they
'ould be e%er&ising their gift 'ithout &laiming a responsible
6headship6 'hi&h is not theirs(
"tott should be gi!en &redit for his balan&ed stand here$ but he is 'rong 'hen
saying that ?aul0s 'ords in 1 Corinthians 17137 and 1 Timothy 2112 6refle&t the
fa&ts of our human &reation and are not affe&ted by the fashions of a passing
&ulture6( ?aul0s statements in these !erses 'ere based on his mistaken !ie' of the
Adam and ,!e story as literally true( "o 'hile they &arried the signature of -od at
the time ?aul 'rote them$ 'hen fe' 'omen re&ei!ed the benefit of edu&ation$ 'e
&an guess that these statements are one of the things -od sighs about today 'hen
anyone mentions them as a reason for denying 'omen an equal role in ministry(
And 'ith 'omen no' Fust as 'ell)edu&ated as men$ and &ertain to remain so$ "tott
is espe&ially 'rong in suggesting that if 'e o!erturn the rule that 'omen must
a&&ept male leadership in ministry then 'e are allo'ing oursel!es to be 6affe&ted
by the fashions of a passing &ulture6(
5omose*uality
Christian !ie's on homose%uality !ary from abhorren&e$ to sympathy$ to the
realiAation that it is Fust a feature of some people$ like red hair or blue eyes( That
third !ie' is emphati&ally the 'ay the la' no' sees matters$ permitting
homose%ual a&ts bet'een &onsenting adults but quite rightly pres&ribing se!ere
penalties for those 'ho &ommit homose%ual rape or abuse &hildren$ in line 'ith the
la' on heterose%ual beha!iour(
The question for Christians is therefore 'hether a homose%ual a&t bet'een
&onsenting adults is a sin$ 'ith t'o 'ays of seeing things(
A first$ simple approa&h is to say that sin&e -od &reates ea&h of us$ he is the one
'ho has de&ided that 6man A6 'ill be heterose%ual and 6man B6 'ill be
homose%ual( "o the only Christian 'ho &an logi&ally say that all homose%ual a&ts
are sinful is one 'ho belie!es that -od literally for&ed Adam and ,!e to &onfront
indefinitely the tree bearing deli&ious forbidden fruit1 an idea 'hi&h + reFe&ted in
Chapter 13 as being in &onfli&t 'ith ?aul0s 'ords in 1 Corinthians 10113(
This should not be seen as a 6la%6 approa&h to matters( The 6one flesh6 rule in
:ark 101;)12 .quoted abo!e 'hen dealing 'ith abortion/ applies as mu&h to
homose%uals as to heterose%uals( "o homose%ual infidelity and promis&uity are
definitely both sins$ espe&ially no' that the la' .in Britain$ sin&e 2004/ pro!ides
for &i!il partnerships for gay &ouples(
A se&ond$ less straightfor'ard approa&h looks at 'hat a !ery fe' Bible passages
say on the subFe&t( The e!angeli&al 5ohn "tott identifies these passages as follo's
in +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today1
1( The story of "odom .-enesis 1311)13/ JandK the !ery similar
story of -ibeah .5udges 13/(
2( The <e!iti&al te%ts .<e!iti&us 18122B 20113/ 'hi&h e%pli&itly
prohibit Jand pres&ribe the death penalty forK 6lying 'ith a
man as one lies 'ith a 'oman6(
3( The apostle ?aul0s portrayal of de&adent pagan so&iety in his
day .omans 1118)32/(
7( T'o ?auline lists of sinners$ ea&h of 'hi&h in&ludes a
referen&e to homose%ual pra&ti&es of some kind
.1 Corinthians ;13)10B 1 Timothy 113)10/(
+ shall deal 'ith these four sets of passages in turn(
The "odom and -omorrah story in -enesis 18)13 has been 'idely misunderstood(
Girst$ it in!ol!es an attempted homose%ual rape and so is irrele!ant to the question
of 'hether or not &onsensual homose%ual a&ts are sins( And se&ond$ the episode
in!ol!ing <ot and the t'o 6angels6 in "odom is a spy story on a par 'ith 5oshua
sending the spies into 5eri&ho(
Ce kno' from -enesis 17 that the ,lamite king Chedorlaomer had re&ently looted
"odom( "o the &ity 'ould ha!e been e%tremely ner!ous( And ne's of t'o
unidentified men ha!ing entered the &ity and lodged 'ith <ot$ himself a
6soFourner6$ immediately sent the entire population rushing to <ot0s house( The
&ro'd0s suspi&ion 'as that the 6angels6 'ere spies$ 'ith e!eryone 'anting to kno'
e%a&tly 'ho they 'ere( And the suspi&ion 'as &onfirmed by the angels0 6striking
the men 'ith blindness61 the a&t of spies 'ho had &ome prepared 'ith pepper
po'der in their po&kets to fling in the eyes of any 'ould)be &aptors(
The -ibeah story in 5udges 13 is again about attempted homose%ual rape and so is
also irrele!ant to the issue at hand(
Chere the <e!iti&us 18122 and 20113 la's against 6lying 'ith a male as 'ith a
'oman6 are &on&erned there are t'o issues( Did -od promulgate these la's at the
time of :osesI And does the fa&t that they are in the Bible and therefore &arry the
signature of -od mean that all homose%ual a&ts$ e!en &onsensual ones$ are sinsI
Ce &an be sure that -od did not issue these la's at the time of :oses( Girst$
be&ause of 'hat Bible s&holars tell us( And se&ond$ be&ause it is unthinkable that
-od 'ould ha!e omitted from the Ten Commandments something so serious as to
require his imposing the death penalty(
Before &onsidering the impli&ations of the fa&t that the <e!iti&us prohibitions &arry
the signature of -od$ + first &omment on 'hat ?aul says in omans 112;)29$ 1
Corinthians ;13)10 and 1 Timothy 113)10(
?aul 'rote these epistles after the 73 A(D( Coun&il of 5erusalem and the passages
in question refle&t the 6deal6 made at that time( ?aul 'as gi!en freedom to run his
6-entile6 &hur&hes on non)5e'ish lines$ but only in return for his promising to
ensure that &hur&h members 6abstained from un&hastity6 et&( .A&ts 14123/( "o 'ith
the 5e'ish Christian &hur&h headquarters in 5erusalem insisting upon &omplian&e
'ith the <e!iti&us prohibitions$ ?aul had no &hoi&e but to follo' suit(
There is no denying that both the <e!iti&us and ,pistles prohibitions &arry the
signature of -od( But that signature 'as gi!en at a time 'hen all homose%ual a&ts
'ere illegal( The &hange in the la' in 2004$ bringing in the ne' &i!il partnerships
'hi&h most of the Chur&h no' endorses$ &oupled 'ith the fa&t that the Ten
Commandments make no mention of homose%uality$ means that it must be 'rong
for Christians today to see homose%ual a&ts by parties to a &i!il partnership as
sinful(
Gay !riests and bisho!s
"o far 'e ha!e looked at Christian attitudes on homose%uality in general( Ce no'
turn to the first of t'o spe&ifi& areas 'here the Chur&h fa&es a maFor pra&ti&al
&hallenge1 that of gay priests and bishops(
+t is one thing to e%pe&t a Christian to be perfe&tly &omfortable 'ith the fa&t that
the man or 'oman in the ne%t pe' is a homose%ual or a lesbian( But 'hat if 'e are
talking about the man or 'oman leading the 'orship in &hur&h or responsible for
the spiritual needs of an entire dio&eseI
:y o'n ans'er is that pro!ided the priest or bishop is either in a &i!il partnership
or li!ing alone$ there is again no problem be&ause there is no sin in!ol!ed( But for
some Christians this is too simple an approa&h(
En the one hand$ they may be un&omfortable 'ith the !ery idea of &i!il
partnerships$ feeling that they dire&tly brea&h the &lear prohibitions against
homose%ual pra&ti&es laid do'n in <e!iti&us and in ?aul0s epistles( All + &an do
here is to reiterate 'hat + said abo!e(
En the other hand they may ask1 >o' &an anyone be sure that a gay priest li!ing
alone is genuinely &elebateI :y reply to this is1 +f it &omes to that$ ho' do 'e
kno' that any priest li!ing alone is &elebateI +nstead of asking stupid questions
like this$ 'e should remember -od0s 'ords in -enesis 21181 6+t is not good that the
man should be alone6( <i!ing alone is a great tragedy for anyone and 'e should
support all su&h priests and bishops$ gay or not$ as they de!ote their li!es to ser!ing
both -od and us(
Same/se* marriage
2ot'ithstanding the &hange in la' in Britain in 2004$ pro!iding for &i!il
partnerships$ 5ohn "tott 'rote in +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today in 200;1
,!ery kind of se%ual relationship and a&ti!ity 'hi&h de!iates from
-od0s re!ealed intention Jthe union of one man and one 'omanK is
ipso fa&to displeasing to him and under his Fudgment( This
in&ludes polygamy ((( &ohabitation ((( &asual en&ounters ((( adultery
and many di!or&es ((( and homose%ual partnerships(
J5ohn "tott$ +ssues Ga&ing Christians today$ p( 748K
Bra&keting adultery .something 'hi&h has been de&riminaliAed/ 'ith &i!il
partnerships .no' spe&ifi&ally pro!ided for in British la'/ is quite strange( And it
'as partly as a result of statements like this that pressure finally de!eloped for the
la' to e%tend the long)e%isting pro!ision for .one man$ one 'oman/ &i!il
marriages to same)se% &ouples as 'ell(
"ome se&tors of the Chur&h kept rather quiet as the 6gay marriage6 debate heated
up in Britain in 2012( But the Catholi& Chur&h in parti&ular 'as highly !o&al$
pointing out that the 'ord marriage had al'ays had one meaning and one meaning
only$ the union of one man and one 'oman$ and that it 'as totally 'rong to misuse
language in this 'ay(
The Chinese philosopher Confu&ius 'arned against Fust this sort of thing ba&k in
the 4th &entury B(C( saying$ 6+f names not be &orre&t$ language is not in a&&ordan&e
'ith the truth of things6 .Anale&ts$ N+++(iii(4/( And the Chinese language lea!es
little room for &onfusion o!er the meaning of the !erb 6to marry6 'hi&h in Chinese
is jiehun$ &oupling t'o &hara&ters jie and hun$ 'here jie ./ &ombines a meaning
element .silk thread/ 'ith a phoneti& element and hun ./ &ombines a meaning
element .'oman/ 'ith a phoneti& element$ thus gi!ing the pi&ture of marriage
as something 'hi&h binds a man and a 'oman together( Ce shall return to the
question of the misuse of names in a different &onte%t in Chapter 28(
Ginally$ though$ let us look again at the 'ords 6one man$ one 'oman6( :ost
people$ + am sure$ relate this to the Adam and ,!e story and to 5esus0 &omment in
:atthe' 1314);$ 'here he quotes -enesis 2127( But this is only one part of 'hat
the Adam and ,!e story has to say about marriage( "ignifi&antly$ -enesis 2)3
mentions the 'ord 6'ife6 si% times and the 'ord 6husband6 t'i&e( "o the message
+ dra' is that marriage is not merely an arrangement 'hereby one man and one
'oman be&ome legally a &ouple( :ore pre&isely it is an arrangement 'hereby a
&ouple be&ome legally husband and wife$ both of these terms gender)spe&ifi&(
The %hurch and the world
As of 2012$ the same)se% marriage issue is one of the Chur&h0s trying to persuade
politi&ians to a&t sensibly and responsibly( But if the politi&ians su&&eed in &arrying
through their plans to e%tend the 'ord 6marriage6 to in&lude same)se% &ouples$ the
need 'ill then be&ome for the Chur&h .and for indi!idual Christians/ to a&t
sensibly and responsibly(
And the real issue here$ 'ith abortion and same)se% marriage as &ases in point$ is
that of the relationship bet'een the Chur&h and the 'orld(
The first problem here is that the Chur&h is not a single entity( A great deal of 'ork
'as done in the 20th &entury .and &ontinues to be done in the 21st &entury by
6Chur&hes Together6 bodies/ to bring the &hur&hes &loser together( And on
abortion$ at least$ the Chur&h does speak 'ith one !oi&e( But on marriage)related
issues some indi!idual denominations often$ at best$ remain silent or$ at 'orst$ !ie
to be the first to do this or that$ thus playing into the hands of the politi&ians 'ho
&an then &laim that 6many in the Chur&h support the proposed measures6(
A se&ond problem fa&ing the Chur&h here is that of striking a balan&e bet'een 6not
&onforming to the 'orld6 .omans 1212/ and risking be&oming irrele!ant to the
'orld( This is of &ourse the !ery point 'hi&h 5ohn "tott made in +ssues Ga&ing
Christians Today .see Chapter 17/$ although + do not agree 'ith e!erything he said
there( -etting married in &hur&h is$ for many people$ the first time in their adult
li!es that they enter a &hur&h and + sin&erely belie!e that my &hur&h 'edding
played a role$ sub&ons&iously at least$ in my be&oming a Christian 13 years later(
"o if the la' is &hanged to allo' same)se% marriage$ and if some denominations
start performing these marriage on &hur&h premises .as + am sure they 'ill/$ then +
hope that the main body of the Chur&h 'ill think &arefully about 'hether or not
-od 'ill 'ant them to follo' suit(
The third and final problem for the Chur&h here is that of striking a balan&e
bet'een 'hat its members 'ant and 'hat -od 'ants( :any indi!idual Christians
today are horrified by the 'ay the 'orld is &hanging around them and respond by
opposing all &hange and moderniAation$ e!en 'ithin the Chur&h itself( The Chur&h
&annot totally ignore the !ie's of its members$ but t'o points &ome to mind here(
Girst$ ?aul urged the early Chur&h to 6be subFe&t to the go!erning authorities6
.omans 1311/( "o unless the =@ legislati!e bodies and &ourts themsel!es de&ide
.or &an be persuaded/ to inter!ene$ the Chur&h is on firm ground in urging
Christians today to respe&t the Fudi&ial de&isions &oming out of the ,uropean Court
of >uman ights in "trasbourg( And the Chur&h is on e!en firmer ground in urging
all its members to respe&t =@ la's on abortion and homose%uality(
"e&ond$ all professional bodies are keen for their members to be kept up)to)date on
the latest ad!an&es in their fields( "o the Chur&h similarly has the right .and the
duty/ to keep its members 6up)to)date6 in t'o 'ays here( En the one hand$
informing its members about irresponsible proposed ne' legislation and spelling
out the bibli&al reasons for the Chur&h0s opposition( But on the other hand$ if the
proposed legislation is passed$ spelling out to its members the bibli&al reasons for
a&&epting it( The latter 'ill in&lude !erses like omans 1311$ mentioned abo!e$ but
also things like the Adam and ,!e story 'here ne' light shed by s&ien&e or Bible
s&holarship has pro!ided fresh understanding of -od0s Cord(
+ single out the Adam and ,!e story be&ause the Chur&h itself has made the 6fall6
the se&ond most important e!ent in all of human history .the most important of
&ourse being the ministry of 5esus in the 1st &entury/( And be&ause$ if the proposed
same)se% marriage legislation does e!entually pass into la'$ e!ery Chur&h member
.along 'ith most other members of the British publi&/ 'ill 'onder ho' the Chur&h
'ill square this 'ith the Adam and ,!e story0s pi&ture of 6one man$ one 'oman6(
The best approa&h for the Chur&h 'ill be to point out that the Adam and ,!e story
is a parable about repentan&e and that$ 'here marriage is &on&erned$ the main thing
the story is saying is that 6marriage is for life6( This$ after all$ 'as 5esus0
&on&lusion from the story .:atthe' 131;/(
But some denominations$ espe&ially those opposed e!en to &i!il partnerships$ are
&ertain to &ontinue beating the drum about 6one man$ one 'oman6( There are t'o
points to make here( Girst that$ by labelling e!en same)se% marriages bet'een non)
&hur&hgoers as sinful$ these &hur&hes 'ill be guilty of the !ery 'orst form of
Fudging others .5esus in :atthe' 911 and ?aul in 1 Corinthians 4112/$ espe&ially
sin&e none of the Ten Commandments are being brea&hed( And se&ond$ that these
&hur&hes should make !ery sure that none of their members .in 'hose name they
speak/ are guilty of adultery$ 'hi&h does brea&h the Ten Commandments$ before
6&asting the first stone6 .5ohn 819/(
Chapter !2 The ne$ )iotechno1o3
+ mentioned earlier a spe&ially &ontributed &hapter by ?rofessor 5ohn Cyatt in 5ohn
"tott0s book +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today( The &hapter is entitled 6The 2e'
Biote&hnology6 and begins as follo's1
>istori&ally$ the maFor bioethi&al issues &onfronting Christians
ha!e &on&erned the destru&tion of inno&ent human life$ both at the
beginning of life in abortion$ and at the end of life in euthanasia (((
Although abortion and euthanasia remain as topi&s of &ru&ial
signifi&an&e at the beginning of the t'enty)first &entury$ a range of
ne' and troubling bioethi&al dilemmas ha!e arisen o!er the last
t'enty years( +nstead of the destruction of human life$ these
&on&ern the creation and the manipulation of human life(
J+ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ p( 713K
;ecent advances in biotechnology
?rofessor Cyatt 'rote his &hapter in 200; and lists four areas 'hi&h ha!e seen
maFor te&hnologi&al ad!an&es sin&e 13981
1( +n !itro fertiliAation .+#G/1 more than 1$000$000 &hildren
&on&ei!ed as a result of +#G 'orld'ide by 200;(
2( "ophisti&ated geneti& te&hniques to s&reen embryos1 JtheseK
may be used to a!oid the implantation of an embryo that
&arries a serious or fatal disease$ but &an also be used to
sele&t the se% of the future &hild(
3( eprodu&ti!e &loning1 the &reation of an embryo for
implantation into a 'omb leading to the de!elopment of a
ne' indi!idual Jthe first being 6Dolly the sheep6 in 1339K(
7( Therapeuti& &loning1 the &reation of a human embryo 'hi&h
&an then be manipulated to produ&e stem &ells JofferingK the
prospe&t of remarkable ne' treatments for a range of (((
inherited$ degenerati!e and &an&erous diseases(
J+ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ pp( 713)72;K
Cyatt identifies four themes behind the issues raised by these ad!an&es1
1( Biote&hnology &ollapses the distin&tion bet'een natural and
artifi&ial( Ce no longer ha!e to a&&ept the limitations of our
bodies as they ha!e been gi!en to us(
2( Biote&hnology &hanges the nature of parenthood( ?erhaps
before too long$ sele&ting the best embryo 'ill be seen as an
essential part of responsible parenthood( 6+ o'e it to myself
and to my future &hild to gi!e himLher the best possible start
in life(6
3( Biote&hnology offers the possibility of solutions to the age)
old problems of humankind( :any trans)humanists belie!e
that ultimately ((( te&hnology may lead to a ne' form of
6post)human beings6$ beings 'ho may ha!e indefinite
health)spans$ mu&h greater intelle&tual fa&ulties &ompared
'ith &urrent human beings$ ne' types of sensory a'areness
and enhan&ed &ontrol o!er their intelle&tual and emotional
fun&tioning(
7( The prospe&t of spe&ta&ular future therapies trumps ethi&al
&on&erns in the present( Chen the possible future benefits of
resear&h are 'eighed against ethi&al &on&erns about the
manipulation of embryos in a simplisti& utilitarian analysis$
it is the prospe&t of ne' therapies$ ho'e!er spe&ulati!e$ that
'ill al'ays dominate(
J+ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ pp( 72;)723K
%hristian res!onses
Chen turning to 'hat he sees as the Christian response to all this$ Cyatt begins
'ith t'o points dra'n from -enesis 1$ the first on 6&reation order6 and the se&ond
on 6the image of -od6( >e 'rites1
-od has not only &reated the physi&al stru&tures of &reation$
in&luding the physi&al stru&ture of our bodies( >e has also &reated
a hidden moral order 'hi&h dire&ts ho' those stru&tures should be
used$ in other 'ords ho' 'e should beha!e( +t is as though there is
a hidden 6grain6 'ithin all &reation(
+n Christian thought the dignity of a human being resides not in
'hat you &an do$ but 'hat you are$ by &reation( >uman beings do
not need to earn the right to be treated as godlike beings( Eur
dignity is intrinsic$ in the 'ay 'e ha!e been made(
Cyatt then turns to the 6fall6 in -enesis 3$ suggesting that1
Although the uni!erse is fra&tured and broken follo'ing the fall$ a
&ru&ial part of bibli&al understanding is that the uni!erse still
displays the moral order$ the hidden grain( +ts brokenness is the
brokenness of order and not &haos(
As -od had 'arned them$ the disobedien&e of Adam and ,!e led
dire&tly to the entran&e of death into the 'orld1 6Gor 'hen you eat
of it you 'ill surely die(6 +n the poeti& imagery of the &reation
narrati!es$ 'ithin the garden of ,den Adam and ,!e$ along 'ith
all the other fruit 'ithin the garden$ had a&&ess to the tree of life(
They &ould ha!e &hosen to eat the fruit of that tree and li!e
fore!er( +nstead they &hose to disobey -od and eat the one fruit of
the garden that 'as forbidden( By gi!ing a&&ess to the fruit of the
tree of life$ -od sho'ed that his original intention for human
beings 'as e!erlasting life( +n bibli&al thought the death of human
beings$ in all its horror and mystery$ is not natural$ it is not part of
-od0s original design (((
But ((( for all its terror and mystery$ in the bibli&al 'orld!ie' death
is not an entirely negati!e &on&ept( +t may be$ in C("( <e'is0
'onderful phrase$ 6a se!ere mer&y6( At the end of the a&&ount of
the fall$ human beings are banished from the garden of ,den$
pre&isely to pre!ent them from eating from the fruit of the tree of
life and li!ing for e!er( And to pre!ent their return and &apture of
the fruit by for&e of arms$ &herubim and a flaming s'ord are set to
guard the 'ay to the tree of life .-enesis 3121)27/( "o in -od0s
pro!idential &are of his &reation$ human beings are not meant to
li!e for e!er in their degraded fallen state( >uman lifespan is
limited$ not Fust as a &urse$ but out of /od's grace ((( This bibli&al
perspe&ti!e helps us to retain a sense of the limitations of medi&ine
and health &are( Gor all our 'onderful kno'ledge and te&hnology$
'e are unable to redeem our physi&al bodies from the &y&le of
death and de&ay ((( Ce &annot o!er&ome ageing and e!entual death
by medi&al te&hnology( +n -od0s pro!idential mer&y$ that route to
the tree of life remains blo&ked by a flashing s'ord(
After making !arious other points$ Cyatt &loses his &hapter 'ith a 6summary of
Christian responses61
1( The need to empathi7e 'ith the deep and hidden pain of
&hildless &ouples$ of families de!astated by geneti& illness$
of indi!iduals fa&ing degenerati!e &onditions su&h as
AlAheimer0s disease(
2( The need to challenge the mentality 'hi&h is starting to
per!ade modern so&iety Jand toK demand demo&rati&
a&&ountability$ transparen&y and Fusti&e in the a&tions of
those 'ho &ontrol the te&hnology(
3( The need to de!elop a more profound understanding of
'hat it means to be a human being$ &reated in -od0s image$
&ontaminated by e!il$ yet affirmed and redeemed by the
Christ e!ent ((( Ce need rene'ed input from theologians and
bibli&al s&holars 'ho &an refle&t on the nature and
impli&ations of the natural &reated order and our role 'ithin
it( At the same time 'e need the insights and pra&ti&al
e%perien&e of do&tors$ geneti&ists and reprodu&ti!e s&ientists
'ho &an build a bridge bet'een the bibli&al 'orld and the
'orld of modern s&ien&e(
7( The need to present an alternati!e bibli&al 'orld!ie' to
our so&iety ((( Jone 'hi&hK respe&ts the physi&al stru&ture of
our bodies 'hilst pointing to a greater reality$ a deeper
healing$ and a hope 'hi&h trans&ends the gra!e(
4( The need to stri!e for global justice in the appli&ation of
biote&hnology ((( Jspending ourK billions of dollars ((( on the
hundreds of thousands of &hildren dying in the poor
&ountries of the 'orld from &onditions 'hi&h are easily
treatable 'ith the minimum of medi&al te&hnology Jinstead
ofK on sophisti&ated biote&hnology resear&h into the
dete&tion and treatment of rare geneti& disorders ((( JandK
into the slo'ing of the ageing pro&ess(
:y res!onse to 'yatt's views
5ohn Cyatt is a professor of neonatal paediatri&s so + ob!iously do not &hallenge
'hat he says about the s&ien&e of biote&hnology or the s&ope 'hi&h it has for
profoundly &hanging many things in our 'orld( But on the basis of the &on&lusions
+ ha!e &ome to about the true nature of the Adam and ,!e story$ the true nature of
-od and the true nature of the Bible$ + disagree 'ith some of the other things Cyatt
says abo!e(
6+B
Cyatt suggests that 'e need to empathi7e 'ith the deep and hidden pain of
&hildless &ouples( + take this to be a perfe&tly &orre&t &riti&ism of some Christians
'ho 'ill glibly say to &hildless 'omen that their &hildlessness is -od0s 'ill$ that
he has more important things for them to do in life ((( usually something like
helping out in the &hur&h &rP&he during ser!i&es(
But + feel that the appropriate Christian response here is to sympathi7e 'ith
&hildless &ouples( The Bible repeatedly speaks of the great sorro' and indeed
humiliation 'hi&h &hildlessness brings to married 'omen$ e%amples being "arah$
ebekah$ a&hel$ >annah and ,liAabeth( This is espe&ially a problem in Asia$
'here + spent most of my adult life and 'here the need to &ontinue the family
name 'ill 6for&e6 husbands to pro&reate else'here and e!en di!or&e their 'i!es(
-od0s response in the &ase of the abo!e fi!e 'omen 'as to perform a di!ine
mira&le( Cho are 'e today to deny su&h 'omen a no' readily)a!ailable human
6mira&le6I
The other point 'hi&h Cyatt makes is that biote&hnology 6&ollapses the distin&tion
bet'een natural and artifi&ial6$ that 'e no longer ha!e to a&&ept the limitations of
our bodies as they ha!e been gi!en to us( +f this is seen as an obFe&tion to +#G then
+ reply that many standard 6medi&al inter!entions6 today are artifi&ial1 not least$
performing &aesarean se&tions and putting babies born 'ith breathing problems
into in&ubators(
The screening of embryos
Cyatt is of &ourse quite right to deplore the s&reening of embryos purely to sele&t
the se% of the future &hild( This is$ after all$ no different to the aborting of foetuses
6of the 'rong se%6 mentioned in Chapter 2; and is !ery definitely a sin( But Fust as
'ith abortion$ the sin here 'ill not al'ays rest on the shoulders of the 'oman$ 'ho
may be either una'are that se%)sele&tion has taken pla&e or denied any say in the
matter( "o in my !ie' the Christian response ought to be sympathy for the 'oman
.in some &ases at least/ and empathy for a &ouple 'ho$ as Cyatt puts it$ 6&hoose an
embryo of the opposite se% to an older sibling6(
En Cyatt0s other &on&ern$ that sele&ting the best embryo 'ill one day be seen as an
essential part of responsible parenthood$ + see only a relati!ely small number of
people in the 'orld as being likely to pursue this option( + feel sure that the la'$ as
it de!elops in this field .'ith the benefit of input from people like Cyatt himself/$
'ill take a&&ount of the rele!ant moral and pra&ti&al &onsiderations( And + regard
the sin in!ol!ed here as not that mu&h more 'i&ked than the 'ealthy person0s
sending his or her &hildren to a ridi&ulously e%pensi!e pri!ate s&hool instead of
using the money to help fund a rural s&hool for &hildren in a poor &ountry
some'here 'ho 'ould other'ise re&ei!e no edu&ation 'hatsoe!er(

Global Custice in the a!!lication of biotechnology
That last &omment brings us to 'hat Cyatt said abo!e about the need to stri!e for
global Fusti&e in the appli&ation of biote&hnology( + take his point that the billions
spent on sophisti&ated resear&h into the slo'ing of the ageing pro&ess et&( 'ould
be better used to pre!ent &hildren in poor &ountries from being 6permanently
blinded for la&k of a fe' &ents0 'orth of !itamin A6( But + feel the Christian
response here should be to support &harities .like the Christian Blind :ission/
already &ombating blindness o!erseas$ rather than pointing an a&&using finger at
the drugs &ompanies(
Presenting an alternative biblical worldview to our society
-i!en that my book is about the Adam and ,!e story$ my main &on&ern is 'ith
'hat Cyatt sets out as the first part of the 6alternati!e bibli&al 'orld!ie'6 'hi&h
he 'ants to present to so&iety( + quoted in some detail 'hat he said about the 6fall6
abo!e$ so here + simply summariAe1
Adam and ,!e &ould ha!e &hosen to eat the fruit of the tree of life
and li!e fore!er( By gi!ing a&&ess to the fruit of that tree$ -od
sho'ed that his original intention for human beings 'as
e!erlasting life( +n bibli&al thought the death of human beings is
not part of -od0s original design(
But at the end of the a&&ount of the fall$ human beings are
banished from the garden of ,den$ pre&isely to pre!ent them from
eating from the fruit of the tree of life and li!ing for e!er( "o in
-od0s pro!idential &are of his &reation$ human beings are not
meant to li!e for e!er in their degraded fallen state( >uman
lifespan is limited$ not Fust as a &urse$ but out of /od's grace(
This bibli&al perspe&ti!e helps us to retain a sense of the
limitations of medi&ine and health &are( Ce &annot o!er&ome
ageing and e!entual death by medi&al te&hnology( +n -od0s
pro!idential mer&y$ that route to the tree of life remains blo&ked by
&herubim and a flaming s'ord .-enesis 3121)27/(
This first part of Cyatt0s 6bibli&al 'orld!ie'6 is probably 'hat most Christians
belie!e( But the real question is1 Chat is 6so&iety6 going to make of itI +t is one
thing to talk to 6so&iety6 about the reality of life after death .as Cyatt does in the
se&ond part of his bibli&al 'orld!ie'/( And some non)Christians do perhaps
imagine that the -arden of ,den 'as a disease)free paradise$ 'ith death only
entering the frame after Adam and ,!e 'ere sent out into the real 'orld 'ith all its
thorns and thistles and all its ba&teria and !iruses( But the idea that human lifespan
is limited out of /od's grace 'ill ine!itably be met 'ith derision(
+f 6so&iety6 as a 'hole is going to a&&ept a 6bibli&al 'orld!ie'6 then this needs to
be one 'hi&h presents -od in belie!able terms( And Fust as no one seriously
belie!es that either the medi&al profession or the drugs &ompanies 'ill one day
&ome up 'ith the 6eli%ir of life6$ so too no one outside the Chur&h seriously
belie!es that a -od 'ho kno's e!erything failed to foresee that Adam and ,!e
'ould eat the forbidden fruit(
The bibli&al 'orld!ie' 'hi&h so&iety needs to be gi!en &an &ertainly begin 'ith
the Adam and ,!e story$ pro!ided the story is presented in its true light as a parable
about repentan&e( And 5esus0 &oming &an then be presented in its true light1 that he
&ame to bring the message of a lo!ing and forgi!ing Gather -od and to establish
the Christian Chur&h(
A bridge between the biblical world and the world of modern science
Ginally$ + &omment on Cyatt0s suggestion that1
Ce need the insights and pra&ti&al e%perien&e of do&tors$
geneti&ists and reprodu&ti!e s&ientists 'ho &an build a bridge
bet'een the bibli&al 'orld and the 'orld of modern s&ien&e(
:y response here is that one side of the bridge has already been built$ by the
s&holars and s&ientists 'hose 'ork + set out in Chapters 3)11( The need no' is not
for more input from do&tors and reprodu&ti!e s&ientists but rather for the Chur&h to
start building its side of the bridge( And + hope this book may be of some help as
the Chur&h dra's up its blueprint(
Chapter !4 A !1"t Cent(r S(pp1ement to the
Adam and Eve Stor
+n this final &hapter + present a 21st &entury supplement to the Adam and ,!e story(
:y aim is not to supplant the -enesis !ersion of the story but to supplement it by
putting its underlying issues into a modern &onte%t( + use the same frame'ork as
the e%isting !ersion .see Chapter 3/ but + also bring in points taken from the
original herder myth !ersion .Chapter 19/ and from 5esus0 parable of the Ci&ked
Tenants .Chapter 4/( And + &lose by &ommenting on ho' + see my ne' !ersion of
the story as$ on&e more$ both a parable and a manifesto1 a parable about repentan&e
and$ here$ a manifesto for a return to the idea of 6enlightened self)interest6(
Prologue
After the Big Bang and the formation of the solar system$ and after all today0s plant
and animal spe&ies had emerged .-enesis 1/$ -od &reated mankind by planting
souls in all members of Homo sapiens(
:ankind 'ere originally hunter)gatherers$ li!ing in fairly small bands( The men
hunted big game 'hile the 'omen gathered nuts and berries( Band members
follo'ed the enlightened self)interest ethi& of 6share and share alike6( But hunting
big game 'as dangerous 'ork and so$ around 20$000 years ago$ -od taught men
ho' to use nets$ traps$ the bo' and arro' et&( to tap into less dangerous food
sour&es like fish$ birds and small forest animals( And he taught 'omen to e%pand
their gathering to in&lude 'ild &ereals( -od intended this for good but$ 'ith people
no' able to settle do'n and li!e together in large numbers for the first time$ greed
began and enlightened self)interest be&ame a thing of the past(
Around 10$000 years ago -od taught men to herd &attle and sheep$ intending that
this 'ould gi!e them greater respe&t for all &reatures and also a steady sour&e of
milk$ 'ool and meat( But some people 'ere un'illing to look after animals and
instead stru&k upon the idea of &rop farming1 &ulti!ating 'ild &ereals instead of Fust
eating them( This led to a &hange in the 'ay many people regarded -od( >unters
had al'ays 'orshipped one -od and herders still did like'ise 'hereas &rop
farmers$ needing both sunshine and rain$ no' started 'orshipping a multipli&ity of
hea!enly gods as 'ell as the !ery earth itself$ seen as a goddess( But abo!e all$
&rop farming led to the sharpening of greed$ to the emergen&e of pri!ate property
and to the beginnings of sla!ery( And 'ith 'ays found to store them for long
periods$ &ereals like 'heat e!entually be&ame a medium of e%&hange and thus the
first form of money(
Scene 1, The &forbidden fruit&
:oney may not gro' on trees$ but it has al'ays had the potential to be&ome the
6forbidden fruit6 .-enesis 2119/ of the modern era1 hen&e 5esus0 'ords in :atthe'
;127 .*ou &annot ser!e -od and mammon/ and ?aul0s 'ords in 1 Timothy ;110
.<o!e of money is the root of all e!il/(
-od is not saying here that money is e!il in and of itself( =sed properly it &an do a
great deal of good( But if misused$ in gambling or in greedy 6get ri&h qui&k6
s&hemes$ it &an do an enormous amount of harm( -reed$ as already sho'n$ is not a
ne' phenomenon( But money only started de!eloping its full potential$ for good
and for ill$ 'ith the massi!e in&rease in o!erseas trade seen in the 19th &entury and
then the onset of the +ndustrial e!olution in the 18th &entury( The need for money
rose so dramati&ally that banking &hanged for e!er and the modern finan&ial
madness began 'ith the opening of sto&k markets around ,urope(
Chat -od is saying in 5esus0 and ?aul0s statements is that money is something 'e
should earn through honest hard 'ork and should use to meet the genuine needs of
our o'n families and .to the e%tent 'e &an/ to help those around us and else'here
in the 'orld 'ho are in dire po!erty( :ore than that$ or less than that$ is misuse of
money(
Scene 2: The naming of the &animals&
+n the earliest times$ -od in!ited people to name all the many kinds of animals he
&reated and brought to them .-enesis 2113/( But in the 20th &entury the situation
'as !ery different( :ankind took o!er the role of &reating ne' 6animals6 .for
e%ample$ !arious &omputer gadgets/ and began in!enting or borro'ing names for
them .like 6mouse6/ 'hi&h gre' steadily more and more &onfusing for the a!erage
person(
An early philosopher$ Confu&ius$ had 'arned against misusing names in this 'ay(
And a serious problem arose 'hen the habit of gi!ing things &ute but rather opaque
names spread to banking as 'ell( +n 'hat pro!ed to be a fateful mo!e bankers$ and
indeed go!ernments$ redefined the 'ord credit( Erdinary people kne' that a &redit
balan&e on their bank a&&ount statement or utilities bill meant that they 'ere not
6o!erdra'n6 or behind on their payments( But suddenly banks started introdu&ing
6&redit6 &ards 'hi&h meant the !ery opposite1 &redit had no' be&ome debt( And the
idea that debt and greed 'ere good ine!itably had dire &onsequen&es( The foolish
began li!ing far beyond their means and the smart began looking for e!en &le!erer
'ays of parting fools from their money and of luring them into loans they &ould
ne!er repay(
Credit &ards limit the amount of unse&ured debt that a holder &an take on( "o a
person 'anting to buy a house needs to take out a mortgage se&ured by the house
itself1 if there is a default$ the bank &an re&oup the shortfall by selling the house(
Despite this banks 'ere !ery &areful 'hen issuing mortgages$ doing so only to
people 'ith a high likelihood of &ompleting repayment( But &ompetition in the
mortgage market$ and the s&ope for making e!en larger profits by &harging higher
than normal interest rates$ led to banks in&reasingly issuing &le!erly)named 6sub)
prime mortgages6 .so mu&h ni&er)sounding than 6high)risk mortgages6$ 'hi&h is
'hat they really 'ere/ to people 'hose ability to repay 'as !ery mu&h in question(
Scene : The snake and the eating of the forbidden fruit
Chat the bankers did 'ith sub)prime mortgages$ 'hi&h be&ame the 6forbidden
fruit6 of the early 21st &entury$ 'as similar to 'hat the snake in the traditional
Adam and ,!e story did to ,!e .-enesis 311)4/( They e%ploited the gullibility of
inno&ents$ leading them into risky territory 'hile lining their o'n po&kets( ,!en
'orse$ they led a large number of other people in the 'ider in!estment &ommunity$
people 'ho should ha!e kno'n better$ into the equally risky territory of in!esting
in deri!ati!es &reated by 6bundling up6 these sub)prime mortgages(
>o' did the bankers manage to de&ei!e the inno&entsI +n mu&h the same 'ay as
the snake de&ei!ed ,!e( The snake said$ 6*ou 'ill not die6B they said$ 6>ouse
pri&es 'ill ne!er go do'n6( The snake said$ 6*ou 'ill be like -od$ kno'ing good
and e!il6B they said$ 6*ou 'ill be like the ri&h$ o'ning your o'n home6( And ho'
did the bankers mislead the rest of the in!estment &ommunityI By playing on their
greed(
There is of &ourse nothing immoral about &harging higher rates of interest on 6sub)
prime mortgages6( After all$ life insuran&e &ompanies quite properly set higher
premiums for ne' poli&yholders 'ith 6impaired li!es6( But 'hy did the banks 'ho
pro!ided the mortgages$ and those 'ho bought the deri!ati!es$ not realiAe that
higher interest rates made the likelihood of defaults e%ponentially greaterI The
ans'er is that they did realiAe this but did not &are1 e!en if the housing market
dipped slightly$ they 'ould still make a profit( And they probably sa' themsel!es
as doing a 6good deed6 by helping at least some poor people to o'n their homes(
But$ as -ore #idal said$ no 6good deed6 goes unpunished(
Scene ": The conse=uences
etribution &ame as qui&kly and une%pe&tedly for the bankers as -od0s return to
the garden follo'ing the eating of the forbidden fruit in the e%isting Adam and ,!e
story .-enesis 318/( After rea&hing a peak in mid)200; the housing market in the
=("(A( suddenly 'ent into a steep de&line$ triggering a banking &risis and then an
e&onomi& &risis(
-od ga!e Adam and ,!e an opportunity to repent and seek forgi!eness .-enesis
313)13/( And$ although not spelt out in -enesis$ the pi&ture from 5esus0 parable of
the Ci&ked Tenants in :ark 12 is that -od 'ould in fa&t ha!e gi!en them many
opportunities to repent( But after 200; those 'ith sub)prime mortgages 'ere
sho'n no su&h mer&y and led a sorry parade of people defaulting on their house
loans1 e!en in the good times$ let alone the bad times 'hi&h had no' arri!ed$ they
had struggled to keep up their mortgage payments( Ce &an &ompare these people to
,!e$ no' suffering greatly multiplied pain in bearing the burdens of life(
Those 'ho had bought the deri!ati!es &an be &ompared to Adam( 5ust as he 'as
e%pelled from his garden and thereafter had to 'ork mu&h harder for his li!ing$
they too found themsel!es in a !ery different$ mu&h harder in!estment lands&ape to
the one they had enFoyed pre!iously(
But Fust as the snake 'as punished by ha!ing its legs &ut off$ so too the key
retribution 'as reser!ed for the bankers( The sub)prime mortgages$ 'hi&h had
be&ome the 6forbidden fruit6 for the poor$ no' be&ame 6to%i& assets6 for the banks
themsel!es( And 'ith e!eryone no' 6gunning for6 the bankers$ further 6sins6 soon
&ame to light in&luding the libor rate fi%ing s&andal and se!eral &ases of large)s&ale
money laundering(

E!ilogue
As 'e read in the final !erses of -enesis 3 and in its sequel in -enesis 7$ -od did
not abandon the &ouple as they left their garden( "imilarly$ go!ernments 'ere
un'illing to stand by and 'at&h their banks and e&onomies &ollapse( Enly time
'ill tell 'hether the steps taken$ things like quantitati!e easing$ 'ill ultimately
pro!e to ha!e been 'ise(
Ef &ourse the moti!es of go!ernments here s&ar&ely mat&h up to those of -od( -od
had 'arned Adam and ,!e in the &learest possible terms that eating the 6forbidden
fruit6 'ould ruin their li!es( But not a single go!ernment had 'arned its &itiAens
about the dangers of taking out mortgages 'hi&h they &ould not afford( En the
&ontrary$ su&&essi!e go!ernments in Britain had urged people to buy their homes$
had en&ouraged banks to make easy &redit as 'idely a!ailable as possible and had
done nothing to dis&ourage the gambling fe!er 'hi&h had engulfed the nation(
,!eryone had assumed that &onsumer borro'ing and spending 'ould fuel an e!er)
impro!ing e&onomy(
2aturally$ too$ go!ernments geared their responses to the &risis to 'hat their
ele&torates 'anted and 'ould a&&ept( "o the British go!ernment not only
6guaranteed6 deposits in banks in Britain but e!en e%tended this prote&tion to those
'ho$ greedy for e!en higher interest rates$ had put their money in banks as far
a'ay as +&eland( But no go!ernment dared to do !ery mu&h to help those 'ho had
lost their homes and 'ho 'ere$ in the !ie' of most of the ele&torate$ simply
!i&tims of their o'n stupidity(
:y su!!lementary version of the story as a !arable about re!entance
:y supplementary !ersion of the story is intended first of all as a parable about
repentan&e( :any of 5esus0 parables spoke of angry kings and masters punishing
their ser!ants and similarly$ in my !ersion of the Adam and ,!e parable$ the
!i&tims of the 6sub)prime mortgages6 deba&le found the full 'eight of institutional
retribution &oming do'n on them(
But the point made by 5esus$ by the ?riest .Chapter 13/ and by myself is that$ 'hile
'e &annot e%pe&t to es&ape the 'orldly &onsequen&es of our greed and stupidity$
-od is someone 'e &an al'ays turn to in repentan&e( Chate!er 'e do$ 'hether
eating 6forbidden fruit6 or any of the other dreadful things that 'e so easily get
tempted into$ -od stands &onstantly ready to forgi!e and &omfort those 'ho turn to
him and to pro!ide them 'ith a 'ay for'ard( Cith -od$ tomorro' really &an be
another day(
:y su!!lementary version of the story as a manifesto
Ginally$ my supplementary !ersion of the story is also intended as a manifesto
appealing for a return to the enlightened self)interest$ the ethi& of 6share and share
alike6$ 'hi&h &ame to an end 'hen$ as + mentioned in the ?rologue$ hunting bands
&oales&ed into larger groups or tribes(
Ef &ourse 'e &an ne!er return to the 'orld of the stone)age hunter( But 'e should
at least refle&t on ho' 'e lost our sense of enlightened self)interest and on 'hat it
'ould mean in today0s 'orld( And abo!e all$ 'e should re&ogniAe that the present
e&onomi& &risis is the pri&e 'e are no' starting to pay for allo'ing greed to blind
us to the importan&e of enlightened self)interest as one of the basi& rules of life(
"eeing the terrible destru&tion &aused today by earthquakes$ tsunamis and
hurri&anes$ 'e are 'ell a'are that nature is an un&onquerable for&e( *et e!eryone
seems to ha!e forgotten that our li!es are subFe&t to other po'erful for&es as 'ell(
,&onomists may imagine that they are on top of their subFe&t no' that they ha!e
redu&ed it to a mass of mathemati&al formulae( And it is &ertainly true that the
modern banking system is !ery &le!er in the 'ays it &reates money( But the lesson
of the present &risis is that e&onomi& for&es are not fully &ontrollable$ espe&ially
'hen e!eryone ignores the simple rule of enlightened self)interest(
"o 'hat e%a&tly does 6enlightened self)interest6 meanI +ts starting)point and
lo'est le!el is 6Do not do to others 'hat you 'ould not 'ant them to do to you6( +t
is plain &ommon sense not to be o!er)greedy and not to treat others in a 'ay 'hi&h
'ill in!ite repayment in kind if e!er the tables are turned( And this applies to
diploma&y$ to &ommer&e and to personal and industrial relations alike(
The se&ond le!el of enlightened self)interest is playing the role e%pe&ted of any
de&ent &itiAen1 stri!ing to be lo!ing &hildren$ siblings$ spouses and parentsB
follo'ing the ethi& of 6share and share alike6B and being patrioti& in the broad
sense of obeying the la'$ paying ta% in full .no ta% a!oidan&e/ and supporting
&harities for the needy(
The third and highest le!el of enlightened self)interest is to 6Do to others 'hat you
'ould Jbe delighted toK ha!e them do to you6( 5esus says this in :atthe' 9112 and
then in :atthe' 24134)3; he spells it out1
+ 'as hungry and you ga!e me food$ + 'as thirsty and you ga!e me
drink$ + 'as a stranger and you 'el&omed me$ + 'as naked and you
&lothed me$ + 'as si&k and you !isited me$ + 'as in prison and you
&ame to me(
This applies not only at the personal le!el but also in terms of global po!erty issues
like disaster relief$ foreign aid and Fusti&e in international trade( Chate!er it &osts$
it is in our o'n best interests to help those 'ho ha!e fallen to get ba&k up on their
feet1 instead of being a perpetual burden or threat they 'ill be&ome our future
allies and trading partners(
-od does not insist that 'e be perfe&t$ and he readily forgi!es us 'hen 'e repent
after 'e fail him and break his rules( But 'hat breaks his heart is 'hen 'e fail to
use the 6image6 he planted in mankind all those years ago to think things through
and see the merit of enlightened self)interest(
Appendi: O(t1ine of the Ca"e for Datin3 the
Stor at &42 B;C;
The Adam and ,!e story possibly originated as long as ;$000 years ago$ but it
under'ent maFor &hanges 'hen -enesis as a 'hole 'as put into its present form
by 5e'ish priests in the 4th &entury B(C(
The &ase for 789 B(C( as the date of the story rests on t'o assumptions( Girst$ that
the story 'as originally an an&ient herder myth .'ith 'heat$ intended for the
animals$ as the forbidden fruit/ &ondemning the religious pra&ti&es of early &rop
farmers 'ho sa' the snake as a fertility symbol( "e&ond$ that 4th &entury B(C(
5e'ish priests re'rote this myth to remo!e the idea that -od hated &rop farmers
and to enable the story to ser!e as t'o things at the same time1 a parable about
repentan&e and a manifesto urging 5e's e%iled in Babylon sin&e 489 B(C( to return
to 5erusalem(
Cyrus of ?ersia had &aptured Babylon in 433 B(C( and gi!en permission for the
5e's to go ba&k home( But any thought of e!eryone returning qui&kly 'as put on
hold after an ad!an&e party of 5e's found all the best land in the hands of
Canaanites 'ho harassed them &ontinually( Things impro!ed some'hat after
Darius + &ame to the ?ersian throne in 422 B(C( and ordered the harassments to
stop( But Darius0 prestige 'as badly dented by ?ersia0s defeat by the -reeks at
:arathon in 730 B(C( ,gypt re!olted in 789 B(C( and the Canaanites then resumed
their harassments( "o the 5e's in Babylon$ marking the 100th anni!ersary of their
e%ile$ re)opened the debate on returning home( 2ot least sin&e the imminent
su&&ession of a ne' ?ersian ruler .Darius 'as ;3 years old in 789 B(C( and died a
year later/ might see them ensla!ed again$ Fust as in ,gypt &enturies earlier( And
'ith region)'ide &haos seemingly looming$ 789 B(C( 'as the perfe&t moment for
the 5e'ish priests in Babylon to 'rite a &ombined parableLmanifesto urging the
5e's there to return home(
The snake0s 'ords refle&ted the temptation for the 5e's still in Babylon to stay
there and hope to &ontinue to enFoy the prosperity brought by ?ersian rule( Adam0s
being punished by ha!ing to farm land bringing forth thorns and thistles refle&ted
the fa&t that 5e'ish men returning to 5erusalem 'ould initially ha!e to farm poorer
quality land( ,!e0s 6greatly multiplied pain in &hildbearing6 pointed to the need for
5e'ish 'omen going ba&k home to ha!e more babies1 to s'ell the 5e'ish nation
and thereby strengthen its hand against the Canaanites( And the e%pulsion from the
-arden of ,den pointed to -od0s no' 'anting the remaining 5e's in Babylon to
lea!e its hanging gardens and return to 5erusalem(
Boo%" Cited
Augustine$ The City of -od$ -reat Books of the Cestern Corld J#olume 1;K
translation$ ,n&y&lopaedia Britanni&a$ 1333
>oly Bible$ -ood 2e's #ersion JGren&hK1 <A B+B<,$ Vdition &ondensWe de
"Wle&tion du eader0s Digest$ 1330
>oly Bible$ 2e' +nternational #ersion$ Uonder!an$ 1388
>oly Bible$ 2e' 5erusalem #ersion1 "tudy ,dition$ Darton$ <ongman X Todd$
1337
>oly Bible$ e!ised "tandard #ersion$ Collins$ 1393
Bill Bryson$ A "hort >istory of 2early ,!erything$ Doubleday$ 2003
od Caird$ Ape :an$ Bo%tree$ 1337
5ohn Cal!in$ +nstitutes of the Christian eligion$ -reat Books of the Cestern Corld
J#olume 20K translation$ ,n&y&lopaedia Britanni&a$ 1333
Charles Dar'in$ The Des&ent of :an J1891K$ -reat Books of the Cestern Corld
J#olume 73K edition$ ,n&y&lopaedia Britanni&a$ 1331
5ohn Drane$ 5esus and the four -ospels$ <ion$ 1393
Cill Durant$ The "tory of Ci!iliAation$ ,aston ?ress$ 1332
:i&hael -reen$ Ad!enture of Gaith$ Uonder!an$ 2001
"tephen >a'king$ A Brief >istory of Time$ Bantam ?ress$ 1388
5ohn >ay'ood$ The +llustrated >istory of ,arly :an$ Bison -roup$ 1334
+llustrated Bible Di&tionary$ +nter)#arsity ?ress$ 1380
Da!id @onstant$ The Gaith of the Catholi& Chur&h ) A "ummary$ Catholi& Truth
"o&iety$ 2001
C( "( <e'is$ :ere Christianity$ Gount$ 1399
:al&olm ,( <ines$ A 2umber for your Thoughts$ +nstitute of ?hysi&s ?ublishing$
138;
<+E2 >andbook of Christian Belief$ <ion$ 1382
<+E2 >andbook1 The >istory of Christianity$ <ion$ 1399
<+E2 >andbook1 The Corld0s eligions$ <ion$ 1337
"tephen Eppenheimer$ Eut of ,den$ Constable$ 2003
E%ford Bible Commentary$ E%ford =ni!ersity ?ress$ 2001
:i&hael oaf$ Cultural Atlas of :esopotamia and the An&ient 2ear ,ast$
Che&kmark Books$ 1330
5ohn "tott$ Basi& Christianity$ +nter)#arsity ?ress$ 1348
5ohn "tott$ +ssues Ga&ing Christians Today$ Uonder!an$ 200;
@eith Card$ Christianity1 A "hort +ntrodu&tion$ Ene'orld$ 2000
@eith Card$ -od$ Gaith X The 2e' :illennium$ Ene'orld$ 1338
i&k Carren$ The ?urpose)Dri!en <ife$ E:G$ 2003
Inde:
<Chapter n(m)er"=
487 )(C( 18* 21* A%%e#i+
4004 )(C( 1* 2* 10* 12* 13
Abortio 26* 27
Abra,a$ 13* 17* 20-22
A.t& 15 21* 26
A#a$ a# E/e 2
A#a$0& rib1 2* 4* 13
D'&t o2 t,e 3ro'#1 2* 4* 7* 13* 16* 19* 23
!ir&t e/er $a a# 4o$a1 2* 4* 12-14* 19
Pai i .,il#beari3 2* 4* 16-18
A#a$ a# E/e &tory 3* 14* 25* 28
A.t'al te+t o2 5ee&i& 2-3 3
Je&'&0 relati/e &ile.e 5
6iteral tr't,1 2* 12* 13* 16* 17* 23* 25
Parable1 12* 14* 16-19* 22* 23* 25* 28
Poetry1 12* 15-17
Myt,1 12* 16* 17
Mai2e&to1 16-19* 28
Earlier ,er#er $yt, /er&io 17-20
"e4riti3 o2 17-19
21&t .et'ry &'%%le$et 28
A#'ltery 5* 6* 22* 26
7A2ri.a A#a$7 11
Ai$al& 3* 16* 25* 28
At,ro%olo3y 11
A%e& 4* 10* 11* 23
A%olo3eti.& Pre&& 12* 13
A%%le 3* 16* 17
Arab& 17
Arta+er+e& 18
Arya& 17
A&.e&io: see Je&'&
At,ei&t& 2* 16* 19* 23
A'3'&tie 7* 8* 11* 15* 16* 23
)aal& 17-19
)abylo* )abyloia 9* 16-19* 21* 23
)elie/i3 22* 24
)ible 8see also: 9or# o2 5o#: 21* 25
;2allibility 14* 15* 21
6iteral tr't, 2* 13* 14* 21-23
Good 9ews +ersion DBrenchE 25
9ew 6nternational +ersion 3* 25
9ew (erusalem +ersion 25
;evised Standard +ersion 3* 25
)ible &.,olar&,i% 9* 12* 16* 18* 26
)i3 )a3 11* 23* 28
)iote.,olo3y 27
)ry&o* )ill 10* 11* 23
Cai a# Abel 3* 16* 17* 21
Cai0& 4i2e 4* 13* 16* 17
Cair#* "o# 2* 4* 11* 12
Cal/i 4* 8* 13* 16
Caaa* Caaaite& 17-19
Ca* "ebe..a 6( 11
Cate.,i&$ o2 Cat,oli. C,'r., 2* 16* 17
Ca/e %aiti3& 2
C,il#beari3: see A#a$ a# E/e
C,i$%a<ee& 4* 10* 11
C,o&e %eo%le 19* 21* 23
C,ri&t: see Je&'&
christiananswers@net 13
C,ri&tia $e&&a3e 22-24
C,'r., 16* 19* 23-27
Ci/il %arter&,i%& 26
Co$$a#$et& 5* 17* 22* 24-26
Co$$o a.e&tor& 11
Co&'$$atio 21
Co/eat 20* 21
Creatio 3* 4* 9* 11-15* 21* 23* 27
Creatioi&$ 13
Cro% 2ar$er& 3* 11* 16* 17* 19* 28
Cro&&: see Je&'&
Cyr'& 18* 19* 21
Daiel 18* 21* 22
Dari'& 18
Dar4i* C,arle& 10* 13
Day o2 ='#3$et: see Co&'$$atio
Deat, 7* 16* 21* 22-24* 27
Di/or.e: see A#'ltery
dltk/bible@com 18* 25
DNA 4* 10-13
7Do.'$etary ,y%ot,e&i&7 9* 12
Drae* Jo, 16* 17* 22
D'rat* 9ill 7* 11* 21
D'&t o2 t,e 3ro'#: see A#a$ a# E/e
E#e: see 5ar#e o2 E#e
Elo,i$ 9
Eli3,tee# &el2-itere&t 11* 28
E/iro$et 13* 14
E%i&tle& 21* 22* 26
Et,i. .lea&i3 19* 23
E/a3eli.al C,ri&tia& 14* 16* 21* 26
E/e: see A#a$ a# E/e
E/ol'tio 10* 11* 15* 23
E+ile 9* 16-19
E<ra 18* 21
!ait, 8see also: )elie/i3: 12* 20* 22* 24
!all 7* 8* 11-15* 17* 21* 27
!ear o2 5o# 25
!ertility .'lt& 16* 17
!le&,* >e 2le&, 3* 5* 16-19* 26
!loo#: see Noa,
!orbi##e 2r'it: see !r'it
7!orei3 4i/e&7 18
!or3i/ee&&* 5o#0& 16* 20-24
!or3i/i3 ot,er& 22* 24
!r'it 3* 4* 16-19* 28
!'#a$etali&$* !'#a$etali&t& 12-14* 16
5ar#e o2 E#e 1* 3* 16
5ay %rie&t&* bi&,o%& 26
5ee&i& 1 3* 4* 12-16* 19* 23* 28
5ee&i& 2-3: see A#a$ a# E/e &tory
5ee&i& 2:24 5* 6* 16* 26
5eeti. #ri2t 11
5il3a$e&, E%i. 17
5lobal %o/erty 27* 28
5o# 2* 23* 26* 28
6o/i3 !at,er 5o# 5* 8* 19-23* 25
P'i&,i3 5o#1 5* 7* 16* 19-23* 25
?,e 6>"D 5o# 3* 9* 16* 17
Good 9ews +ersion: see )ible
5o&%el& 17* 22* 24
5ra2* @arl Aeiri., 9* 12
5ra%e 16* 17* 19
5reat )ooB& o2 t,e 9e&ter 9orl# 7* 8* 10
5ree* Mi.,ael 12* 14* 16* 20* 21
halakhah@com 16
Aa4Bi3* Cte%,e 7* 11* 15* 23
Aay4oo#* Jo, 11* 17
Aea/e 22-24
Aea/eD&By 2* 23
P'r%o&e o2 e+.l'&io& 2ro$ 20
Aebre4& 8atio: 20
Aell 20* 22* 23
!ire 20* 22
>'ter #arBe&& 20* 22
Aer#er& 3* 11* 16* 17* 19* 28
Aer#er $yt,& 17* 20
Aoly C%irit 18* 22
Ao$ii#& 10* 11
Ao$o ere.t'&* ,abili&* ,el$ei 10
Ao$o &a%ie& 2* 4* 10* 11* 23* 28
Ao$o&e+'ality 26
Ao%e 24
A'ter& 11* 28
A'%2el#* Aer$a 9
Ay%ot,e&e& 16
;.e a3e 11
6llustrated $ible 7ictionary 6* 15* 23
;$a3e o2 5o# 2* 4* 7* 12* 14* 16* 21* 23* 27* 28
;.e&t 4* 13* 17
;2allibility: see )ible
;telli3et #e&i3 23
;&aia, 9* 16* 17* 19* 21
7J7 9* 12* 16
Je&'& 5* 14* 16* 20* 21* 24
A&.e&io 23
Deat, o t,e .ro&& 21
Aar# &ayi3& 22* 24
Me&&a3e 22
Parable&: see Parable& o2 Je&'&
Ce.o# A#a$1 6* 7* 8
Ce.o# .o$i3 20* 21* 23
Co o2 5o# 21-23
Je4&* J'#ai&$ 17-19
Je<ebel 17* 19* 21
Ji/a a# At$a &tory 17
Jo, t,e )a%ti&t 18* 20* 21
Jo&,'a 19* 23
J'#a,* Bi3#o$ o2 9* 17-19* 21
J'#3i3 ot,er& 22* 24-26
J'#3$et: see Co&'$$atio
@o&tat* Da/i# 23
4osmos: see 9orl#
@'ee* Abra,a$ 9* 12
6a4 8see also: >l# ?e&ta$et: 26
6e4i&* C(C( 13* 22* 27
6iberal C,ri&tia& 14-17
76i2e i& a te&t7 13
6ie&* Mal.ol$ E( 23
<609 5andbooks 2* 5* 12* 14* 16* 17* 20
6iteral tr't,: see )ible
6>"D 5o#: see 5o#
76o/e 5o#7 20* 22* 24* 25
76o/e yo'r ee$y7 22* 24
76o/e yo'r ei3,bo'r7 20* 22* 24
6o/i3 !at,er 5o#: see 5o#
Male ,ea#&,i% 6* 14* 16* 26
7Ma* $ale a# 2e$ale7 2* 3* 4* 7* 12-14* 16* 19* 21* 23* 26
Mai2e&to: see A#a$ a# E/e
Marat,o* battle o2 18
MarB 10 5* 18
MarB 12 5* 16* 20* 28
Marria3e 8see also: A#'ltery: 26
Matt,e4 5 5* 21* 22* 24* 25
Matt,e4 7 22* 24* 28
Matt,e4 25 20* 22* 28
Me&&ia, 21
Mii&try 14* 26
Mi&2ort'e 5* 17* 24* 25
Mito.,o#rial DNA: see DNA
7Mito.,o#rial E/e7 11* 12
Mole.'lar biolo3y 11
Moey* 4ealt, 11* 19* 28
MoBey& 4* 10
Mo&e& 1* 4* 9* 12* 17* 20-22* 26
Mo't Ciai 1* 16* 17* 21
Myt,: see A#a$ a# E/e &tory* Aer#er&
Na$e& 3* 26* 28
9ature 11
Nea#ert,al& 2* 10
Neb'.,a#e<<ar 1* 16* 18* 19
Ne,e$ia, 18
9ew 6nternational +ersion: see )ible
9ew (erusalem $ible: see )ible
Ne4 ?e&ta$et 5* 14* 17* 20* 22* 23* 26
9ewsweek 12
Ni.ee Cree# 23
Noa, 9* 13* 16* 17* 19* 21
>beyi3 5o# 20* 22* 24
>;C 6: see ;.e A3e
>l# ?e&ta$et 5* 14* 16* 17* 19-24* 26
Ai&tory 17* 18
6a4 5* 9
7>e 2le&,7: see !le&,
>%%e,ei$er* Cte%,e 11* 12
>ri3ial &i 6-8* 11* 12* 14-16* 21
>ri3i& o2 li2e 23
>ri3i& o2 $aBi# 10-12
>'rao&: see Aea/eD&By
>'ter #arBe&&: see Aell
0*ford $ible %ommentary 6* 9* 16-18* 20* 21
7P7 9* 12* 16* 17* 19* 23
Pai 8see also: A#a$ a# E/e: 13* 24
Palaeotolo3y 10* 11
Parable& 16* 21
5ee&i& 2-3: see A#a$ a# E/e
;&aia, 5: see ;&aia,
2 Ca$'el 12 16* 17
Parable& o2 Je&'& 16* 20
Co$i3 o2 t,e Co o2 $a 20* 21
Di&,oe&t &te4ar# 20* 22
Ao'&eb'il#er 22
P,ari&ee a# ta+ .olle.tor 25
"i., $a a# 6a<ar'& 17* 20
C,ee% a# 3oat&: see Matt,e4 25
Co4er 22
E2or3i/i3 &er/at 20
9ee#& 20
9i.Be# teat&: see MarB 12
Pa'l 6-8* 14* 16* 20* 21* 26
Pell* Car#ial 16
Petate'., 9* 12* 17
Peter* 1 Peter 3 21* 24* 25
P,ari&ee& 5* 22
Pi.t're& o2 5o#: see 5o#
Poetry 12* 14* 15* 17
Po%e )ee#i.t FV; 12
Prayer 13* 23* 24
Pro$i&e# la# 19-21* 23
Pro%,e.y* Pro%,et& 5* 17* 20* 21
P'i&,i3 5o#1: see 5o#
7Q7 17
Q'r0G 17
"e#e$%tio 21
"elati/ity t,eory 1* 2* 11
"e%eti3* "e%eta.e 5* 16-22* 24* 25* 28
"e&'rre.tio o2 t,e #ea#: see Deat,
"e/elatio* )ooB o2 5* 21-23
;evised Standard +ersion: see )ible
"oa2* Mi.,ael 11
Ca.ri2i.e 19-21* 25
Ca##'.ee& 22* 23
Ca$e-&e+ $arria3e 26
C.,olar&,i%: see )ible &.,olar&,i%
C.ie.e 10-13* 15* 16* 18* 23* 25-27
Ce.o# .o$i3: see Je&'&
Cer$o o t,e Mo't 17* 22* 24
Ci3at're o2 5o# 4* 6* 23* 26
Ci 8see also: >ri3ial &i: 5* 7* 8* 14* 20-22* 24-27
Ciai: see Mo't Ciai
CaBe 2* 3* 4* 14* 16-19* 26* 28
Co#o$ a# 5o$orra, 20* 21* 26
Co o2 5o#: see Je&'&
Co o2 $a 21* 22
Co'l 2* 22* 25* 28
C%irit'al #i$e&io 2* 22* 23
Ctott* Jo, 14-16* 21* 22* 24* 26* 27
C'22eri3 &er/at: see Me&&ia,
C'#ay &.,ool 25
Cyo%ti. 5o&%el& 17* 21
?al$'# 16* 17* 18
?e$%tatio 13* 14
?e Co$$a#$et&: see Co$$a#$et&
?e&t 8see also: 76i2e i& a te&t7: 8* 13* 16
?e&ti$oy 24
?rial o2 obe#ie.e: see ?e&t
trueorigin@com 12
?r'&ti3 5o# 20* 22* 24* 25
?r't,* literal: see )ible
Ei/er&e 11* 13* 15* 16* 23* 27
Ve#i. Ai#'i&$ 17
Vieyar#: see ;&aia,* MarB 12
Vir3i birt, 23
9ar#* @eit, 15* 16* 23
9arre* "i.B 13* 16* 20* 23-25
9ell,a'&e* J'li'& 9* 12
9,eat 16-19* 28
'iki!edia 16* 17
9ill o2 5o# 22
9o$e 6* 14* 26
9or# o2 5o# 4* 12* 14* 16* 21
9orB& 22
9orl# 23* 26
Creatio o2: see Creatio
4osmos 23
79rat, o2 5o#7 20
9yatt* Jo, 17* 26* 27
Fer+e& 18
H .,ro$o&o$e 11
HA9A 9* 20
Snop"i" of the Boo%
This book marks the 2$400th anni!ersary of the 'riting of the Adam and ,!e story
in its present form in -enesis( A key o&&asion for the Chur&h be&ause the story
deals 'ith the se&ond most important e!ent in all of human history .the 6fall6/( And
a key o&&asion for e!eryone in the 'orld be&ause the story is by far the best)kno'n
passage in the entire Bible(
The book opens 'ith an a&&ount of the present Adam and ,!e story and 'ith a
series of &ommon sense questions( The &omments of 5esus$ ?aul$ Augustine and
Cal!in on the story are then gi!en$ along 'ith details of ne' light shed in the 13th
and 20th &enturies by s&holars and s&ientists(
Coming to the 21st &entury$ the book first sets out the !ie's of leading
fundamentalist$ e!angeli&al and liberal Christians( +t then argues the &ase for the
present Adam and ,!e story ha!ing been re'ritten in the 4th &entury B(C( from an
an&ient herder myth about -od punishing the !ery first &rop farmers( The !ie' put
for'ard is that the story as 'e ha!e it no' is t'o things at the same time1 a parable
about repentan&e and a manifesto urging 5e's in e%ile in Babylon in 789 B(C( to
return home(
The preliminary &on&lusion is that many Christians misread the story and thereby
arri!e at the 'rong pi&ture both of -od and of the Bible as a 'hole( "o ideas for a
more positi!e approa&h to -od and the Bible are presented$ along 'ith an a&&ount
of the message brought by 5esus$ emphasiAing that he ga!e the pi&ture of a lo!ing
Gather -od totally different to the pi&ture gi!en by a superfi&ial reading of -enesis(
At this point the book sets out frame'orks$ based in part on reading the Adam and
,!e story in the ne' light of 21st &entury kno'ledge$ for defending and e%plaining
the Christian faith to non)belie!ers and for helping Christians to grasp the story0s
'ider impli&ations( And it &ontinues 'ith &omments on some of the &hallenges
fa&ing the Chur&h today$ things like abortion$ 'omen bishops$ gay bishops and
same)se% marriage$ often made unne&essarily &ompli&ated by issues arising
ultimately from a misreading of the Adam and ,!e story(
The book &loses by putting the Adam and ,!e story into a present day &onte%t$
dra'ing a parallel bet'een the 'ay the snake tempted ,!e and the 'ay finan&ial
organiAations marketed sub)prime mortgages in the years leading up to the
finan&ial &risis of 2009$ and urging a return to the long)lost &ommon sense
prin&iple of enlightened self)interest(
))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

ADAM and EVE - The Search For The True Story V9.3

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

ADAM and EVE - The Search For The True Story V9.3

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

ADAM

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi