Free The Lost World of Genesis One by John H. Walton

within the normal conceptual framework of the ancient Near East rather than
forging new scientific trails.
    The materials or ingredients that are attested in the ancient
Near East are tears of a god (Egypt), blood of a god (Atrahasis),
and the most common, clay (both Egypt and Mesopotamia).
These ingredients are offered as common to all of humanity since the ancient Near Eastern texts only deal with the mass of humanity being created rather than an individual or a couple as in Genesis. This is an important difference as Adam and Eve are treated
as individuals in chapters 4 and 5. This individual identity, however, does not change the significance of the reference to the materials in Genesis 2. The fact that the ancient Near East uses the
same sorts of materials to describe all of humanity indicates that
the materials have archetypal significance. Unlike a prototype
(which is an original item that serves as a model for later production), an archetype serves as a representative for all others in the
class and defines the class. So when the ancient Near Eastern
texts speak of people being created from clay or the blood of a
slain deity, they are not talking about just one individual, but are
addressing the nature of all humanity.

    This archetypal understanding applies also to Genesis 2. An
individual named Adam is not the only human being made of the
dust of the earth, for as Genesis 3:19 indicates, "Dust you are and
to dust you will return." This is true of all humans, men and
women. It is an archetypal feature that describes us all. It is not
a statement of chemical composition nor is it describing a material process by which each and every human being is made. The
dust is an archetypal feature and therefore cannot be viewed as a
material ingredient. It is indicative of human destiny and mortality, and therefore is a functional comment, not a material one.
    The situation is no different with the creation of woman. Being drawn from the side of man has an archetypal significance,
not an anatomical one. This is the very aspect that the text draws
out when it identifies the significance of the detail: "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his
wife, and they will become one flesh" (Gen 2:24). This is true of
all mankind and all womankind. Womankind is archetypally
made from the side of mankind. Again we can see that this is a functional discussion, not a material one. After chapter five of
Genesis, Adam and Eve are never again mentioned in the Old
Testament except in the opening genealogy in Chronicles. In the
New Testament, the authors regularly treat Adam and Eve in
archetypal terms.5

    Given these observations, we might conclude that Genesis does
not have the same level of interest in the material origins of the
first humans as we do. It focuses its attention on the archetypal
origins of humanity, mankind and womankind. This interest is
part of functional origins. Humankind is connected to the ground
from which we are drawn. Womankind is connected to mankind
from whom she is drawn. In both male and female forms, humankind is connected to God in whose image all are made. As such
they have the privilege of procreation, the role of subduing and
ruling, and a status in the garden serving sacred space (Gen 2:15).
All of these, even the last, were designed to be true of all human beings. Neither the materials nor the roles are descriptive
only of the first individuals. This creation account gives people
their identity and specifies their connectivity to everything
around them.
    SUMMARY
    In days four to six the functionaries of the cosmos are installed in
their appropriate positions and given their appropriate roles. Using the company analogy, they are assigned their offices (cubicles),
told to whom they will report, and thus given an idea of their
place in the company. Their workday is determined by the clock,
and they are expected to be productive. Foremen