37 Don,

Creation can take time and forming can take time. Moses could have written that Adam before the split was ish, but did not, Adam is simply human and both the man and the woman have that name after the split. The point is to not go beyond the text, going beyond the text in ANY way is speculation; and as long as it is called speculation, I do not see a problem. For our faith, it simply does not matter what type of human Adam was before the split, since it does not say. Since there was only one, it is not even clear what the meaning of type is, type only has a meaning when there are 2 types.

The scripture never lists Eve’s creation as a “split”. When you have surgery and the surgeon removes something from you, it is never called a “split”. This implies something that is not said.

Since creation and forming are one-in-the-same for mankind and since God said he did it in the sixth day, we can be assured that the forming took no longer than the sixth day. I do think that terming this creation as “splitting” is going beyond the text. Is it okay if it is called “speculation”? Perhaps, perhaps not. There is so much in the scriptures that is not speculation, that perhaps we should start there first. Paul did say that things that result in speculations which can produce doubts (1 Timothy 1:4). I do not agree that it doesn’t say what kind of human Adam was. God specifically said that the original creation of mankind was male and female. Adam was not female.

I don’t think that we need to be concerned that Adam was male and think that this is putting females down because they weren’t created first. This is an argument that the hierarchists make about the importance of male over female, but God doesn’t make such a distinction that removes the ability for the woman to function in complete fullness and wholeness in her gifts and equal spiritual calling. Adam’s maleness was God created and it was God’s plan for both male and female to work together.