Tag: Genesis 2:7

First and Last Adam

Posted on

=

First and Last Adam

This article was inspired by the two videos below made by Wayne as he reads from books that delve into Gnosticism.  The  videos are interesting and worth listening to because it is important to understand your enemy.  Gnosticism and Kabbalah are bedfellows and what peaked my interest was the mention of Adam Kadmon.

In Kabbalah there are two Adams and this is based on the so-called contradiction between the different creation accounts in Gen 1:27 and Gen 2:7.

According to Kabbalah the Adam Kadmon (the primordial, original/heavenly) is not the same as the physical, material Adam Ha-Rishon (the first Adam). In Lurianic Kabbalah, the description of Adam Kadmon is anthropomorphic. Nonetheless, Adam Kadmon is divine light without vessels, i.e., pure potential. In the human psyche, Adam Kadmon corresponds to the yechidah, the collective essence of the soul. However this doctrine developed earlier than the Lurianic Kabbalah as Pharisaic theology (Genesis Rabbah) demonstrates: Thou hast formed me behind and before’ (Psalms 139:5) is to be explained ‘before the first and after the last day of Creation.’ For it is said, ‘And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters,’ meaning the spirit of the Messiah [“the spirit of Adam” in the parallel passage, Midr. Teh. to cxxxix. 5; both readings are essentially the same], of whom it is said (Isaiah 11:2), ‘And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him.Of course this is nonsense because Psalm 139:5 simply means surrounded (NIB): “You hem me in–behind and before; you have laid your hand upon me.” Apparently the first wife of Adam was a primordial she-demon called Lilith is cited as having been “banished” from the Garden of Eden for not complying with and obeying Adam. Of course this is all so much nonsense and was condemned by Jesus as the traditions of men. The name Lilith was derived from Isaiah 34:14 from the Hebrew for screech owl.

It has been long known that there are differences between the creation accounts and  18th century scholarship attributed this to different sources but modern scholarship is moving towards more holistic canonical approaches recognizing complexity, intertextuality and  literary conventions as framing the different accounts and using contrast as a deliberate mechanism. Craig Davis remarks:

The poster child example of multiple sources offered by the Documentary Hypothesis is the division of Genesis 1-3 into two separate creation accounts, with the break occurring in the middle of Gen 2:4. The first creation account of Genesis 1 is assigned to P, because of its precise, orderly nature and the use of Elohim as the name for God. The second creation account beginning in Gen 2:4b is assigned to J because of the use of the name YHWH and because of the anthropomorphic nature of His actions. This doublet is actually in a different category from the others. In other cases, we may have two different events that have similarities, but it is clear that there cannot have been two creations.

In analyzing the passage from a Documentary Hypothesis perspective, the problems rush in quickly. The second creation account has very little creating in it – there is no mention of the creation of the heaven, earth, light, darkness, sun, moon, stars, sea, dry land, or fish. All God creates in the second account is one man and one woman, trees in a garden He has planted, and enough animals for Adam to name in one day before he falls asleep. The Genesis 2 account, assigned to J, does not use YHWH alone, but always together with Elohim, “LORD God” in English. While the Ten Commandments in Exodus are assigned to either E or some other early source, they are dependent on the Genesis 1 account of P (see Exod 20:11, speaking of creation in six days), an impossibility given that E was purportedly written 300 years before P. Both passages share the rare feature of God speaking in the plural (Gen 1:26, Gen 3:22, see also Gen 11:7). Genesis 1-3 was not treated as two accounts in antiquity; in Matt 19:4-5 Jesus quoted from both accounts together.

A better explanation of Genesis 1-3 is that the first section is told from a cosmic, or God’s eye viewpoint. The second section deals with the creation as experienced by one man, Adam. The
personal name YHWH is used, because in this section YHWH deals personally with man. YHWH is combined with Elohim, because in this first introduction of His name the author needs to emphasize YHWH = Elohim the Creator of the universe, a connection not necessarily clear to an ancient Middle-Eastern audience. YHWH is dropped from the name by the serpent during his temptation in Gen 3:1-5. This is also intentional on the part of the serpent, as he wants to disconnect man from his relationship with God. The use of divine names is not an artifact of separate sources, but it is rather deeply intentional, adding to the meaning of the story. Genesis 1-3 further establishes that YHWH Elohim the Creator is also the Lawgiver and Judge. This concept, which seems natural to a western mind, was alien to most of the ancient world the pagan gods were not the source of morality; their own behavior was often immoral. This idea that the Creator is also the Lawgiver is largely lost if Genesis 1-3 is split into separate accounts. The concept of Elohim as creator and YHWH as lawgiver as described in Gen 1-3 is echoed in Psalm 19: “The heavens are telling of the glory of Elohim” (Ps 19:1)…“The law of YHWH is perfect” (Ps 19:7).

Craig Davis, Dating the Od Testament,2007, RJ!Communications (section 3.2.1.9.1 Creation pg 55-56)

46 and 64

Why is the number 46 (chromosome pairs) and its reverse 64 (number of condons) so prolific in the creation account of man?  The  ordinal value for the full verse in Gen 2:7 is 614 which has the palindrome R2 of  1331  (614+416=1030 1st iteration ,1030+301=1331 2nd iteration)  is the same as the standard value phrase man and female in Gen 1:27 and this number is the cubic value of 11 (11x11x11) and eleven reduces to 2  (male and female).

First and Last Adam

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. (1 Cor 15:45-46)

The apostle Paul, who was a rabbi, would certainly have been aware of the Adam Kadmon and other rabbinic fables and he deliberately turns it on its head making Jesus the heavenly spiritual Adam of a second creation.  The creative act of Christ was his death and resurrection which placed all things in a different relationship to God (Col 1:16).  The believer becomes a new creation in Christ.  When Paul speak of a quickening spirit he is most certainly thinking of the LXX Deut 32:39 ζῇν ποιήσω (zen poieso)  as in make alive and the Greek employed in 1 Cor 15:45 ζωοποιοῦν (zōopoioun) “make alive, enliven”.  The passage in the Deuteronomy Song of Witness understands Yahweh as the judge who both takes and restores life. To make alive, or enliven is particularly used of God infusing His life in the believer. The Lord infuses eternal life (zōē) into us each time we receive (obey) faith from Him. This enables living with God – not just for Him (cf. Gal 2:20; Rom 8:28-30; 1 John 5:4). His self-existent, all-powerful life overcomes all the deadly effects of sin.

 

The Left Emanation… Part 1 (Remastered)-1:30 min

I am making this paid-subscriber only episode free as a preview to show you what you could be missing out on by not upgrading to a paid subscriber. I hope you find value in this offering.
Reading from, "Baphomet The Temple Mystery Unveiled", by Tracy R. Twyman and Alexander Rivera...

 

Gnosticism And The Reign Of Confusion… (1:44 min)

Reading from, "That Old-Time Religion: The Story Of Religious Foundations", by the late, great Jordan Maxwell...