I was wondering whether it mattered or not if Adam came first or if Eve came first. Does it make any difference if Eve came first rather than Adam?
21 So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; 22 and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. (Genesis 2:21-22)
For Adam was formed first, then Eve. (1 Timothy 2:13)
Based on the above, Adam was created first, then Eve. Is there some reason why you think these passages should not be taken in the literal sense?
Yes - they were never intended to be taken literally!
Yes - the Genesis passage was never intended to be taken literally.
Of course it was.
The* literal sense.*
(see 115 and following)
It is of course that there is a lot that is perhaps figurative language in the early parts of genesis. But that does not mean there is not a literal sense nor that Adam was not created before Eve.
Really? Then why were the first three fantastic chapters of Genesis written? Pray tell.
Did the author really say: "Today, is the day I will do allegory? Today, is the day that the truths of Divine Revelation are not, repeat not, to be taken literally?
Did the author really say: Today is the day that the readers of my allegory can deny the existence of God Who is mentioned now and then, but never intended to be taken literally?
But does it matter who came first?
It matters to women.
I should’ve mentioned this earlier but my thought process was wouldn’t it make more sense for Eve to come first because of when women become pregnant, the unborn child starts out female then becomes male before birth. This is all probably unrelated but I was thinking about it and thought if there’s a possibility that women came before man.
Yes Adam was the first man.
Man was created first and when God saw he didn’t find a suitable companion for the man among the animals he fashioned woman from Adam’s rib as stated in Genesis. Not hard to understand. :shrug:
Then why is it that the Church herself does not teach a literal reading of Genesis? Do you know something they don’t?
The senses of Scripture
115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.
116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83
117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.
The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.84
The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.85
The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86
Don’t stress the Creation story too much. It isnt a science textbook. If you have a few minutes to burn read this General audience by Pope Benedict XVI. He was a wonderful Theologian and wrote about Creation quite a bit.
They are faith stories - stories told to teach truth…they teach, among other things, that there is one God, that God is the Creator, that all of Creation is good, and that humankind is created in God’s image…
The first rule of storytelling: “All stories are true…some of them actually happened.”
That is not really how they would be discussed.
One may see the various documents of the Church on how to read Divine Revelation in Sacred Scripture. They will give a quite full approach to take with these inspired texts.
The Catechism teaches that the first few chapters of Genesis employs “figurative language”. I think these posters mean that the truths the Sacred Writer communicates “literally happened” (there was an Adam and Eve, they rebelled against God, etc.)…but not that we must take a *literalistic * reading of Genesis as a historical account.
You mean Gen. Chapter 3 - the fall. That is where the CCC notes the use figurative language.
You mean Genesis Chapter 3 - the fall. That is where the CCC notes the use figurative language