gengwall

“2. The sentence structure is the same as with the other animals. God ‘forms’ the creation ( and the narrative identifies what the created animal is i.e. beasts, birds and woman), then God ‘brought them to the man’, to ‘see what he would call them’. To get hung-up on the narrative description of what God has made misses the point.”

There is much to disagree with in your numbered list but this one jumps out at me. While the “sentence structure” may have some passing similarity in each account, the narrative is strikingly different. Some examples:

1. God formed the animals from the ground but Eve was the only creature in creation formed of material from another living creature. This is a striking difference which sets Eve apart from the animals.

2. God brought Eve to Adam but nowhere does the text say he did so “to see what he would call her”. Your claim that the two narratives are parallel on this point is simply false.

3. The narrative says that “whatever name Adam called it [an animal] by, that was its name”. BTW – Adam did not call the animals “bird” and “beast” – another flaw in your argument. There is no such narrative when it comes to Eve. Nothing indicates that “Adam called Eve ‘woman’ and from that point forward that was what her name was”. The two narratives are mutually exclusive on this fundamental point. Your claim that Adam’s “naming” of Eve was identical to his “naming” of the animals is not supported.