Adam

views updated

ADAM

The name given in the genealogical lists of Gn 4.25–5.5 to the first human being, identical in form with the Hebrew word for man, 'ādām. He is named simply Man, not merely because he was the first man, but rather because he was regarded as the type of all mankind (Gn 5.2). However, in the story of paradise and the Fall of Man in Gn 2.4b–3.24 the term is always preceded by the definite article in Hebrew, hā-’ādām, "the man," and therefore in this section it should not be translated as if it were a proper noun. The Hebrew word 'ādām means man in the sense of "mankind"; to designate an individual man, Hebrew must use the term ben ’ādām, son, i.e., member, of the human race. This fact is of some importance in the interpretation of the story of the fall of man, in which the inspired author is speaking not so much about an individual man as about the whole human race typified by this individual.

The derivation of the Hebrew word 'ādām is uncertain. Probably there is nothing more than a folk etymology in Gn 2.7 where it is implied that man is called 'ādām because God formed him out of the dirt of the 'ădāmâ (ground). But in any case, the author of Gn 2.4b–3.24

makes skillful use of this derivation: because man ('ādām ) was formed from the ground ('ădāmâ ), he is destined to till the ground (Gn 2.5) in hard labor (3.17, 23) and ultimately go back to it in death (3.17).

According to the genealogies of the patriarchs, Adam lived for 930 years (Gn 5.5). The children that eve bore him were Cain, Abel and Seth (4.1–2, 25).

After these first few chapters of Genesis, Adam is not mentioned again in the Old Testament until the books written in the last few centuries before Christ (1 Chr 1.1; Tb 8.6; Sir 17.1–4; 49.16; Wis 2.23–24; 9.2–3; 10.1–2), when people began to speculate about the first man. Several curious tales are told about Adam in the apocryphal and rabbinical writings.

In the New Testament, besides the passing references in Lk 3.38, Acts 17.26, and Jude 14, Adam is mentioned in connection with the Christian doctrine on marriage (Mt 19.4–6; Eph 5.31), the position of women (1 Cor 11.7–12; 1 Tm 2.13–14), and especially the teachings of St. Paul on the universality of grace (Rom 5.12–21), the resurrection of the dead (1 Cor 15.21–22), and the state of the glorified body (1 Cor 15.45–49). Paul draws an important contrast between "the first, the old, the earthly Adam" of Genesis and "the second, the new, the heavenly Adam" who is Christ; the former is the "figure" (τύπος) of the latter (Rom 5.14). The Christian must "strip off the old Adam and his deeds and put on the new Adam, so that he may be renewed unto perfect knowledge according to the image of his Creator" (Col 3.9–10).

In theology both Greek and Latin fathers affirmed a privileged state for Adam, head of the human race, before his sin, but the enumeration and analysis of his gifts were arrived at slowly. Some, such as Gregory of Nyssa, tended to elaborate; others, such as Irenaeus, tended to attenuate the Genesis paradisal passages. Augustine formulated the traditional gifts: immortality, impassibility, integrity,

a marvelous knowledge. He made the gift of original justice seem the same as sanctifying grace. Anselm followed Augustine but saw original justice as pertaining to the nature of man. Aquinas taught that Adam was created in grace but left room for a distinction between sanctifying grace and original justice, the former regarded not as a formal constituent of original justice but as efficient cause. He followed Augustine's enumeration of the gifts, as did most scholastics up until the present century. A triple subordination existed in Adam. His reason was subject to God, the lower powers to reason, the body to the soul; and the first subjection was the cause of both the second and third (St. Thomas, Summa theologiae, 1a, 95.1). The Church is more cautious than its theologians. Nowhere are the gifts singly defined. Trent uses the phrase "holiness and justice" to indicate them (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion symbolorum, 1511).

The theory of evolution and the findings of paleontology have proposed many questions about the first man (see evolution). Were there many Adams or just one? Was Adam the paragon of creation or a cave man? Did he know the natures of all created things or was his knowledge very primitive? Contemporary sciences dealing with the origin of man seem to contradict the traditional concept of Adam. "If the details of the evolutionary theory regarding man are still hypothetical, its general direction is uncontestably shown [and] the conception of a primitive paradisal state would seem to be absolutely outside the facts" (Gardeil).

Contemporary theology on Adam has accepted, in general, this trend in scientific thought. Pius XII in 1950 reminded Catholics that "the Catholic faith obliges us to believe that souls are immediately created by God" and that Adam cannot be regarded as representing a certain number of first parents since "it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with what the fonts of revelation and the pronouncements of the magisterium

of the Church set forth concerning original sin" (Enchiridion symbolorum, 3896–97).

Toward a harmony of science and revealed truth, theologians make many points. Three may be mentioned here. There is a parallel between the production of the first man and that of any man. As in the latter case biology cannot ascertain the fact of the infusion of the soul by God, so in the former paleontology cannot ascertain the fact of the divine intervention. Again, sanctifying grace is not to be judged or measured by technology. The first man may indeed have been a primitive; this does not rule out his friendship with god. Finally, the special endowments of Adam may be interpreted now as "germs or possibilities rather than perfections actually realized" (Gardeil).

See Also: eve; creation, articles on; original sin.

Bibliography: Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, ed. a. vacant et al., 15 v. (Paris 1903–50; Tables générales 1951), Tables générales 1:30–33. j. schildenberger, Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, ed. j. hofer and k. rahner, 10 v. (Freiburg 1957–65) 1:127–130. a. robert and a. tricot, Guide to the Bible, tr. e. p. arbez and m. p. mc guire, 2 v. (Tournai-New York 1951–55; v. 1 rev. and enl. 1960) 1:174, excellent bibliog. on European and American lit. to 1960. l. pirot and j. b. frey, Dictionnaire de la Bible, suppl. ed. l. pirot et al. (Paris 1928–) 1:86–134. j. jeremias, in g. kittel, Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament (Stuttgart 1935–) 1:141–143. j. daniÉlou, From Shadows to Reality, tr. w. hibberd (Westminster, Md. 1960). a. vitti, "Christus-Adam," Biblica 7 (1926) 121–145, 270–285, 384–401. c. westermann, Genesis 1–11 (Minneapolis, 1984–86). thomas aquinas, Summa theologiae, 1a, 90–102, and commentary by h. d. gardeil in Somme théologique I.90–102: Les Origines de l'homme, tr. a. patfoort (Paris 1963) 423–451. j. coppens, La Connaissance du bien et du mal et le péché du Paradis (Louvain 1948), also in Revue biblique 56 (1949) 300–308. j. de fraine, The Bible and the Origins of Man (New York 1962). a. m. dubarle, Le Péché originel dans l'Écriture (Paris 1958). c. hauret, Beginnings: Genesis and Modern Science, tr. and ed. e. p. emmans (Dubuque 1964). m. m. labourdette, Le Péché originel et les origines de l'homme (Paris 1953). j. l. mckenzie, Myths and Realities (Milwaukee 1963) 146–181. r. j. nogar, The Wisdom of Evolution (Garden City, N.Y. 1963). h. renckens, Israel's Concept of the Beginning, tr. c. napier (New York 1964). l. f. hartman, "Sin in Paradise," The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 20 (1958) 26–40, with fine bibliog. c. reilly, "Adam and Primitive Man," The Irish Theological Quarterly 26 (1959) 331–345. c. vollert, "Evolution and the Bible," Symposium on Evolution (Pittsburgh 1959) 81–119.