This is more of a lament... and a chance to ask where all the cowboys have gone.

[Rush]

So I'm in the bible study chat room tonight and I bring up a topic.
It was a weird and wonderful query of Gen 2:20. It's where Adam is naming all the animals, and he gets to the end and there was no suitable companion for Adam. Da-doy! So we all say, he's looking through the animals. But the interesting thing is that the bible mentions it. I mean, of coruse there was no suitable companion... should this even be noted?? Why the heck is this noted?? But there it is. So why?

Now here's why this is in the singles forum and not the bible discussion forum. This topic to me is super interesting, as is any speculative theological awesomeness from scripture. If some lady was like... "hey, do you think animals could have been so fundamentally different before the fall it was worth checking them to find Adam a companion?" -- Man, I would lose the plot.

I'd take her out in a second. I've be all shaved and suited up in less time than it takes to formulate a half decent response to the question... haha which arguable could take a while.... sorry ladies

But seriously, no one spoke about it. I prompted, i poked, I outright asked. And nothing. No one had anything to say on the subject.

That's why this is here. I long for a lady that finds the extraordinary, the weird, the far out, the speculative, the just plan intriguing in scripture, actually exciting to discuss.
Where have all the cowboys gone indeed.

Blessings you fishers of men,

~Rush

 

[AsifinPassing]

Well, as I'm not a lady, I hesitated on responding. Nonetheless, I have a theory about this.

God, with some understanding and belief in The Trinity, is a community within Himself. When he made animals, they likely had pairs for procreation. Man, however, was made in God's image, and I speculate/imagine was intended to be part of the Community (the Godhead).

The problem, however, is that this didn't happen. Man saw himself as different from God, and as he looked through the animals, different from them as well. This lead to something new and possibly unintended. The creation or existence of singularity and lonelieness. The LORD looked and said it was good...it as good...it was, oh, not good... Not good for man to be alone.

That's one interpretation however... The other author (because Genesis clearly has multiple writers as you study it...) says that they were likely made simultaneously. "Man and woman he created them.". Either way, lonliness was never meant to exist, rather due to an intended connection with God that's not fulfilled, or by the singleness counter to creation.


That's my theory, anyway. As for how animals looked... Scripture talks about dragons, giants, angels, demons, strange beasts (which may not totally be symbolic), so sure... I wouldn't be surprised as to all the crazy imaginative possibilities of creation and man-like things within it. Regardless, however, I don't see humans as part of the animal kingdom... Just like I don't see angels or demons as having anything to do with humans (from the standpoint of one becoming the other). Anyway...

 

[cinder]

But the Genesis 2 account makes it sound like God said it wasn't good for Adam to be alone, then on God's initiative, God brought all the animals by Adam. Adam didn't go looking for a companion, in fact there's nothing to indicate that Adam was aware of his lack before Eve was created.

So what was the purpose of naming the animals? If I have to guess, I would say that this is the first clear act we see of people ruling over the animals as they were commanded in Genesis 1:28 , but also it was a way for God to highlight to Adam, Adam's own uniqueness. Perhaps having seen all the other animals was what enable Adam to immediately recognize Eve's uniqueness. There must have been some major differences between pre-fall (and I would also say pre-flood) animals and modern animals, if only because Eve doesn't seem at all surprised by a talking serpent. And animals were perfectly willing to come to Noah and get on the ark, but that may be starting a different discussion.

 

[Jullianna]

So I'm in the bible study chat room tonight and I bring up a topic.
It was a weird and wonderful query of Gen 2:20. It's where Adam is naming all the animals, and he gets to the end and there was no suitable companion for Adam. Da-doy! So we all say, he's looking through the animals. But the interesting thing is that the bible mentions it. I mean, of coruse there was no suitable companion... should this even be noted?? Why the heck is this noted?? But there it is. So why?

Now here's why this is in the singles forum and not the bible discussion forum. This topic to me is super interesting, as is any speculative theological awesomeness from scripture. If some lady was like... "hey, do you think animals could have been so fundamentally different before the fall it was worth checking them to find Adam a companion?" -- Man, I would lose the plot.

I'd take her out in a second. I've be all shaved and suited up in less time than it takes to formulate a half decent response to the question... haha which arguable could take a while.... sorry ladies

But seriously, no one spoke about it. I prompted, i poked, I outright asked. And nothing. No one had anything to say on the subject.

That's why this is here. I long for a lady that finds the extraordinary, the weird, the far out, the speculative, the just plan intriguing in scripture, actually exciting to discuss.
Where have all the cowboys gone indeed.

Blessings you fishers of men,

~Rush

That verse of scripture really stands out, doesn't it?

I have a dog. Some people have cats. Some have horses. Animals offer affection. They offer loyalty. They can be great listeners and comforters. They can protect us. They can encourage us. Still, they can't really connect with us like another person, can they?

There are levels of conversation, understanding and intimacy that we cannot reach with animals. Perhaps it was to demonstrate a NEED to Adam. The need for that understanding and intimacy. And yet, even when we DO find a mate to share that understanding and intimacy, we discover we have an even deeper need - a need that only Christ can fill, you know?

 

[Rush]

Ah where have you guys been all my life!

haha, AsifinPassing, always good to hear a theory!
I'm a fan of your thinking in the first. Part of the community of God indeed. It's something that we ignore often in these first chapters becuse they humanity is different from what we are and will be when we are/will be in the community of God. In that though, i think you're totally right. There was a necessary progression for humanity, clearly not yet ready to be part of that community how we understand it now, upon creation, but I think you're right.

As for your second parapraph... im not sure that the text can say that can it?? That Adam saw himself as different from God? Perhaps extrapolated, but is it there somewhere that I've missed?
I think Adam was alone because even though he was yet without sin, he was not yet in a position to be a part of the community as even we are now (post Christ and gift of indwelling of the holy spirit), and definitely not as humanity will be upon Christ's return (complete. post through a lens darkly). Adam was with God in the garden, but not in God yet, you know?
haha that's my thinking anyway.

I might be wrong, but thats the fun of discussion. It's not really a discussion without the possibility of being wrong
Kudos to your brain!

 

[Rush]

Cinder!
I think you're right in the first paragraph, though I think it could be implied that God saw it was not good for Adam to be alone because Adam was lonely (?), but you are right, the text doesn't say it. Still, I'd be up in the air about that one
But there is the phrase in verse 20, "no suitable helper was found". If its there its there for a reason. While I think you're definitely right on the animal naming, those words are still there...
But I am intrigued by your theory that the naming of the animals was to assist in highlighting Eve's distinctiveness. However, if that's the case, why did God need to look and see it was not good for adam to be alone, after the fact of going through all the animals?

And the talking serpent! ahh i love that one... haha i have a fun side discussion to that too. Maybe people could talk to animals before God confused the languages at babel! haha anyway.
But anyway, the serpent, yes. The weird thing about that conversation in the hebrew (from a hebrew lecturer and pastor) is that Eves conversation with the snake is already going when we start reading so we'll never know if Eve was like... woah! a talking snake... saaaayy whhhhaaaat? Or if she was just, yo, how's it goin snake!
But yes, there had to definitely be some major differences because snake may not have always crawled on his belly. The text would indicate that he was at least able to employ another mode of locomotion (fun word)... so yeah, super good point actually

 

[Rush]

Julianna! (always a pleasure to read from you sister).

I am intrigued by your thought process.
There to highlight a need for Christ even before we ever sinned. Most intriguing! Of that i have some fun theorizing
While I'm not sure we can see that in the pre-sin biblical text to that degree, since all of scripture is essentiually our salvation history, i think there's merit to the idea! Kudos to your brain
Since, in my understanding, even as Adam and Eve were created sinless and in a godo creation, they were still able to be subject under sin, and would still need Christ. The community we have with him now, post-cross, is more than they had then. Maybe indeed God was ALWAYS pointing towards a future they could not yet fathom?
I do like it, i like it a lot Some would say thats reading too Christocentrically (fun word to say you're reading Christ into the text where he's not), but i think there might be merit to it

 

[Rush]

Ladies, Gentleman, thank you for your thoughts. It's been a pleasure!
haha, now, if only I could meet more people of your level of brain awesomeness here

Blessings to you all

 

[Raine]

Rush,

I do not think that God went thru all the animals with Adam to figure out that they were incompatible. God wasn't doing it for himself but to show Adam. Adam would not appreciate or understand the uniqueness of Eve if God had not done that. God states these things in scripture to help us understand, not for Him.

Not only that, but God is a God who likes to provide a lot of demonstrative illustrations. He knows that we understand best not only with words but visually as well. Hence, He shows Adam then he tells Adam afterwards.

 

[tourist]

Rush,

I do not think that God went thru all the animals with Adam to figure out that they were incompatible. God wasn't doing it for himself but to show Adam. Adam would not appreciate or understand the uniqueness of Eve if God had not done that. God states these things in scripture to help us understand, not for Him.

Not only that, but God is a God who likes to provide a lot of demonstrative illustrations. He knows that we understand best not only with words but visually as well. Hence, He shows Adam then he tells Adam afterwards.

This is a demonstrative good post, with colorful illustrations.

 

[Jullianna]

Julianna! (always a pleasure to read from you sister).

I am intrigued by your thought process.
There to highlight a need for Christ even before we ever sinned. Most intriguing! Of that i have some fun theorizing
While I'm not sure we can see that in the pre-sin biblical text to that degree, since all of scripture is essentiually our salvation history, i think there's merit to the idea! Kudos to your brain
Since, in my understanding, even as Adam and Eve were created sinless and in a godo creation, they were still able to be subject under sin, and would still need Christ. The community we have with him now, post-cross, is more than they had then. Maybe indeed God was ALWAYS pointing towards a future they could not yet fathom?
I do like it, i like it a lot Some would say thats reading too Christocentrically (fun word to say you're reading Christ into the text where he's not), but i think there might be merit to it

Thank you, kind Sir.

I agree that Adam and Eve were not yet sinless, and that part of the need we have in our lives is for Christ as Savior. But I was thinking of so much more, you know? The MORE Christ is to us after we release our former selves to Him and become His. The children of God we were intended to be from the beginning, when we were created in Their image (since scripture says "in OUR image").

Can you even imagine what it was like for Adam and Eve to walk in the cool of the evening with God??? For me, that is the very definition of the fulfillment most of the singles are seeking here in this forum. It is not simply a godly spouse they need. They AND that godly spouse they seek NEED that bond with God to make the marriage/relationship complete.

BUT...even if that spouse never happens, God does.

 

[zeroturbulence]

Where all the cowboys have gone...

**photo edited**

 

[Shouryu]

This is a demonstrative good post, with colorful illustrations.

This is a post.

 

[Rush]

Raine, thank you
Yep, i agree God, is all about the illustrations for our sake. I suppose if I was an infinite God who had to relate to finite creatures, I'd do it anyway I could too

I don't think God was surprised either about the lack of comparability. I suppose I just wonder why have it in there at all? To underscore the uniqueness of eve?... i suppose I just wonder because when the first people to read the book came about, they would have already known that. It wasn't like Adam himself was reading it and was all, "ohh yeah, of course"... It was the people of Israel however many hundreds or thousands of years later...
So suppose im still left with why is it in there?
But as you say... to underscore the uniqueness of eve..... maybe to underscore the uniqueness of our love for one another? Like marriage is a way of understanding god's relationship with the church... And thus to begin our understanding of the uniqueness of the love God has for Godhead and our inclusion into it?
haha, too much a reach?? but you did get my brain juices flowing grandly Cheers

 

[Rush]

Julianna again

I wonder, if knowing that one day humans would be not just walking with God, but indwelt by him, Adam and Eve would be as excited as you are about that
It spins me out that we have, as sinful beings, something that they didn't have. The holy spirit living in us!
And one day, we will be completely with (as Adam and Eve were), but also completely in God and he in us. I reckon if you told Adam and Eve while they were chilling in the garden with God that there was so much more to come, they would never be able to even begin to understand it
But I suppose that's why God takes his time revealing himself to us. He wants a real relationship. How long does it take to get to know another finite being well enough to spend your whole life with them?? haha, how long for a finite being to get to know the infinite?
Fun You guys are all a bit of alright