Cheryl Schatz

Mark,
You said to pinklight:

an over literal position is one like yours which tries to fit everything into a systematic chronology.

In historical literature a literal interpretation is expected since it is history and history is literal. Genesis is the history of beginnings.

A literal approach (my view) is to say it is historical fact, but not try and squeeze everything to fit systematically.

It is all historical fact, but the ordered system will be clear within its defining context. That is what we do to allow the Scripture to interpret itself without contradiction.

Scriptural proof for Eve’s leaving is the semantic range of ‘ha’adam’.

Scriptural proof can never hinge on merely the semantic range. Rather the key way of defining the proper meaning will be the context. If a meaning is within the semantic range this doesn’t mean that it can be correct in the context. The context is king and the context will either allow or disallow any one of the usual “allowable” meanings.

It can mean more than one person. Therefore Gen 3:22ff includes Eve, but the text is addressed to the man as the head.

Just because a meaning is allowed within the semantic range doesn’t mean that it is allowed within a particular context. Mark you have to know this if you are training to be a pastor. The context can limit the application of one of meanings.