I'm currently reading John Locke's, "An Essay Concerning the True Original, Extent and End of Government" and came across this passage:
“Adam was created a perfect man, his body and mind in full possession of their strength and reason, and so was capable from the first instant of his being to provide for his own support and preservation, and govern his actions according to the dictates of the law of reason God had implanted in him.”
Being an atheist who doesn’t believe in a god who created everything, I started mulling over these questions about the story of creation:
• When Adam was created, what was in his mind?
• Did God give him a memory, or was he like a baby that had to be taught? If given a memory, then a memory of what? If he gave him a memory, did he, upon his creation, know that he was just created, or did he think he just woke up from a sleep? If he had a false memory, was god lying to him?
• Did God give him a language (the Bible implies that he did), and if so, what concepts could he really understand, without any prior experiences?
I know creationists would have rationalistic answers to these questions and I’m not asking for answers… just something to ponder…
I find it silly the amount of energy both sides of the god debate expand on a pointless question. The true power of religion is in the manipulation of fear and doubt as to a persons purpose. The only value of faith of any kind is in its use as a tool to build a healthy personal point of view on ethical and positive behavior both for yourself and others. If a religious institution does good works, feeds the poor etc great though the actions link to coercion in relation to conversion pollutes many such actions. Adams creation has value only in so far as it applies to reinforcing or teaching positive action or thought. Too me it does neither. It simply cements the idea men are superior to woman. For me the only real value of the creation story is the idea that ultimately god allowed satan (being omniscient and all) to lead us down the path to free will because he/she/it did not want to have a population of dumb slaves. Eve being smart enough to have some imagination ate the apple thus moving god's real plan along nicely. Me I am a firm believer in making your own versions of any myths as they are all up for interpretation anyway.
It amuses me how bible bashers day everything in the bible is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth but when you point out a number of things that contradict each other they sit there with a dumb look. They think they have all the answers until they are challenged with logic
Because this site is "agnostic" , I may be out of place commenting (being a misotheist myself) but my take is, the "creator" used his tinker toy set to create "adam" and adam was imperfect. Proof, cancer, lupus, autoimmune diseases, etc, etc. The human body is NOT perfect and never has been. "God threw together some slime and mud and mucus and such and our ancestors crawled out of the ocean and at some point in evolution "he" slapped some sort of cognizance into homo sapiens or homo erectus or whatever and , voila, adam and eve. How many "adams" and "eves" were created is a question no one asks.
Questioning anything from the Bible is a virtual buffet of nonsensical propaganda. I still can't figure out how rapidly they, Adam and his rib manifestation of a presumably "perfect" woman, Eve. must have reproduced. So they pro-created snd then what? Their offspring reproduced - no wonder why we are messed up, our supposed origin is the product of some heavy incest.
This reminds me of two things. One, that accepting the premises of the question causes us to try to make sense of something that is not real in the first place. The sense we take from myths and stories is to apply them to life, not to take them so literally that we impose a kind of hyper-realism onto them as if they were straight history narratives. And two...I can still remember in my undergraduate days (English literature) a professor telling us to be careful when analyzing the psychology of characters in stories. Characters in stories may have been written to have certain psychologies, but fictional characters aren't real, and thus applying real human psychology to them as if they ARE living people can be irrational. (Such as the people who try to diagnose Sheldon from BBT with Asberger's, etc. It is a bit bizarre that we suspend our disbelief so fully with some characters that psychoanalyzing them seems perfectly natural.)
I don't know what was on Adam's mind, but I don't think he was given a "memory" but would have been cognizant and aware of his status as the first man. I am sure that he was given language as he--then Lilith and Eve--conversed. I conjecture that he did not understand "all" concepts as he was warned away from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; it was not truly explained why he needed to not eat the fruit, but had more of an admonition given to a child.
Read the writings about Lilith his first wife. Adam wasnt so perfect.
Also when reading historical texts remember to read it with a prejudicial eye to the historical context. Their paradigm of the world was quite different than ours today. It doesnt invalidate their works, just puts a different spin that we would have if written today.
I doubt that early man spoke a language it is likely that he made animal like noises to signify danger or food. When two or more individuals adapted their noise making to a common pattern language was born. The world of primitive man would have been filled with many events that were beyond his understanding. Imagination gave rise to an explanation for natural events that he could not comprehend and myths were born.