Mark

Cheryl,

When have i said that ‘ha’adam’ has to ‘always’ mean more than one person. You have assumed this about me. But i have clearly said semantically that it ‘can’ mean more than one person.

Your conclusion to say that i therefore have to translate every use of it as more than one person is just ridiculous. You obviously are not reading what i wrote, nor understanding the actual possibilities of the meaning of the word with the definite article.

It was you who said that ‘ha’adam’ can only refer to one person. I have simply shown that is not true. WE have clear examples around the fall narrative proving the opposite of what you have said previously. Please engage properly with what i say not make assumptions.

Now you do state that the returning to the ground etc therefore must exclude Eve. This is a better argument rather than pushing what i say to a wrong conclusion. However you only come to this assumption because you deny the historical position of the church.

Where did Eve return to? Adam’s rib? It is obviously meant to be understood generically, since both Adam and Eve did die and returned to the earth (technically Eve is made from the earth anyway). We also know that both became like God knowing good and evil, since this is what is indicated about eating the fruit before the fall. And we are told that both their eyes are open.

So nothing in Gen 3:22ff excludes Eve-the opposite really. It is only your misunderstanding of ‘ha’adam’ that has lead to your wrong conclusion.

‘ha’adam’ is used becasue of Adam’s headship-plain and simple