So I am reading this book called “Finally Feminist” trying to figure out what the author is saying and if it’s interpretation of biblical texts are … biblical. It’s tough. But anyways, I noticed that the author has this different belief about the account of creation. I remember reading Genesis 1 & 2 when I was younger and thinking that there was something that I was never told before, it seemed to me that God had created human beings first and then, (chapter 2) had created Adam and then Eve from his rib. But I came to realize that it was not so later on in life.
So this author (John G. Stackhouse, Jr.) believes that:
- “Genesis 1 records that the human being was created in God’s image and as male and female in that image (Gen. 1:26-27).”
- “The second, and different creation story of Genesis 2 shows the human being divided by God into male and female. The self-consciousness of the previously undivided human “goes with” the male, and it is he who then recognizes and celebrates the female as his partner upon their differentiation.”
- “… Genesis 1, in which male and female are created at the same time as the image of God.”
I am not even sure what this guy is saying, especially because of my “French understanding of English” as I like to put it. I agree that God created human beings, male and female, in chapter 1 in His image, but I don’t understand why he says that in Genesis 2 that the “human being” is divided by God into male and female and by saying that, implying that in chapter 1 the “human being” was not divided into male and female.
I am actually tired right now and should go to bed. I am mixed up in these thoughts. I don’t believe that chapter 2 is a “second and different creation story” as if we would say that Mark is a second and different life of Jesus… Actually, maybe these words are proper… but I simply think visually. Think of a funnel. Well, Genesis 1 is in the bigger part of the funnel, and Genesis 2 is in the tiny, narrow part of it. Meaning that both are the same account, 1 is a general account of the creation, and 2 is a focus on the creation of the first human being and the second, namely, Adam & Eve.
Any theologians around? I think that names starting with “J” would be good people to comment these quotes and my tired thoughts. Careful, your name might start with “J” and you might have no clue… I’m thinking about at least to people. So think and email me gabeleroux@yahoo.ca or leave a comment. If your name doesn’t start with “J” but you do have some ideas, please leave a comment, it’s always nice if other people like me, who don’t have a clue about these things can read your thoughts.
Friday, May 05, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

2 comments:
My name doesn't start with J. And I'm even more clueless than you. Guess that proves your theory.
Your post made me think of C.S. Lewis' Perelandra. I know I have a beat up second-hand copy somewhere in my house and I can't find it. I hope I didn't throw it out. Anyways, it's pure fiction of course, but it's interesting to read with respect to how he treats the idea of "male" and "female." He incorporates mythology etc., but really, it's kinda neat.
People say Lewis was a misogynist, but I highly doubt that, based on the way he treats his female characters. Jeff Thompson agrees with some good arguments here.
Anyways, none of this is theological, but it's interesting. Perelandra is a good book to read to move your mind past daily routines and get you thinking about God too.
Gabrielle,
The two creation accounts differ in lots of ways. For one thing, the order of creation is markedly different: humanity comes last in Gen. 1, but comes before the garden in Gen. 2. So it's better to see them as two complementary accounts making different, but complementary points--indeed, quite like the four gospels, as you suggest.
So I'm sorry my book is confusing you, but the Bible is a little hard to understand on these matters! I'm just doing my best to sort through what it does and doesn't say about gender.
Thanks for paying attention to it, though, and I hope it makes more sense in the light of a new day!
Post a Comment