Naming the Animals - Genesis 2:19-20
God tells us that Scripture “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” (2 Ti 3:16) Based on this, we know then that there is a reason why some details aren't included in Scripture: God has decided these particular details or stories aren’t important or necessary to our salvation.
Examples:
• Mat 27:52-53 "And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many."
• Luke 3:18 "And many other things in his exhortation preached he unto the people."
• John 20:30 "And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:"
There are some Bible topics that come up in discussion where it's important to note (and agree) that we’re given only a finite amount of information to work with. Claims and opinions will abound in these circumstances but they should always be taken with a grain of salt. A lack of evidence isn’t evidence in itself.
Such circumstances revolve around many of the accounts in the book of Genesis. How long was each day of creation, where do dinosaurs fit in, how did all those animals fit on the ark, etc. etc. A Bible skeptic will often use these questions as a means to disprove Scripture because from a "logical" 21st century point of view, many of the events in Genesis don't have a logical explaination. We would say first that the primary difference between a Christian and a skeptic is faith and it's certainly worthwhile remembering that ultimately, that is the gulf that will always separate the two sides. But as if faith is an inadequate basis for belief, a skeptic will demand to see tangible evidence, assuming (and often hoping) that none exists. And for this we should be thankful so as not to rely on the "I have faith" conclusion to end a discussion we were weren't properly prepared for in the first place. In other words, questioning Scripture is the best way top find your answers.
In summary, while there may not be enough information required to unequivicolly settle a debate, there's almost always enough available to disprove a specific criticism.
Examples:
• We don't know what the precise sin of Sodom and Gomorrah's inhabitants was, but we know they weren't destroyed for a simple lack of hospitality (as certain modern Bibles suggest).
• We don't know when laws against intermarrying were implemented by God, but we know no one was ever punished prior to Moses for marrying their sister or brother.
• We don't know how different races (white, black, asian, etc) were created in Scripture but we do know Noah had three sons who went to Europe, Asia and Africa respectively.
And so onto the topic of discussion:
How many animals did Adam name in the Garden of Eden and how long did it take him?
There's no way anyone knows precisely how the animals were named (i.e. were they in a line, did Adam walk around and see them, etc.), but based on Genesis, we do know that Adam did so in the span of 24 hours. The criticism then is this: If we use current estimates of the number of animals in existence, it’s impossible for Adam to have taken less then the day God provided him with. How do Bible students explain justify the account in Genesis in light of this criticism?When considering the land and time in which Adam was created along with supporting Biblical evidence (and in some cases, the lack of evidence), strong and reasonable assumptions can be made to help fill in some of the gaps. Ultimately, it is the hope that this examination of Genesis 2:19-20 will provide enough information to either springboard an individual into further study or be an effective tool in answering Bible critics.
1. Genesis tells us that animals were created according to their “kinds”, rather than their species. This word indicates limitations of variation. Note the definition of the Hebrew word “kind”: Groups of living organisms belong in the same created "kind" if they have descended from the same ancestral gene pool. Therefore “snake” instead of “python”, “corn snake”, “eastern coral snake”, “cottonmouth”, etc.
2. There were less species in Genesis. For example, there were no domesticated dogs which means “wolf” would have been the “kind” that Adam named instead of the as-of-then-non-existent “Irish Wolfhound”.
3. It's often pointed out that Adam alone wouldn't have had time to name the hundreds of thousands of insects that currently exist. This is a bogus argument. While it looks impressive and certainly lends itself to the impossibility of the situation, the fact is Adam didn’t name insects or sea creatures. Genesis 2:20 says he named "cattle", "birds" and "beasts of the field".
5. There is no suggestion in Genesis 2 that the naming was meant to be comprehensive. It would make more sense if Adam simply gave a set of general names to a selection of animals rather then providing scientific taxonomy. The former and not the latter would have been of greater benefit to the humans who would come immediately after him (see below).
6. Cattle: There are several species of cows (at least five) but there’s no indication in the Bible that a breakdown beyond the generic "bos" (the genus of wild and domestic cows and oxen) was ever required or indeed ever implemented, especially when one considers the broad use of the word “cow” in Scripture without there ever being a distinction between a dairy cow, a meat cow or an ox (an animal which isn't actually referred to until the days of Jacob in Genesis 32). Likewise, the same naming structure could easily have applied for animals such as horses, snakes, birds, etc as we'll see below.
7. Birds: When examining the naming of birds, the same possibility applies. For example, there are 300 species of parrot today. Instead of Adam naming them all, the word “parrot” would legitimately have applied. While we don’t know if all parrots are descendants of one created “kind” or several “kinds” which had enough similar characteristics to label them as “parrots”, in either instance, the naming process would have been quick. There are between 17 - 20 species of penguins but they're all legitimately called "penguins". There are approximately 200 species of owls, all of which are a "kind" of owl. There are around 180 species of woodpecker, all of them legitimately labelled under the single kind of "woodpeckers". And so on...
8. Beasts of the field: Firstly, what animals are considered to be “beasts of the field”? The Hebrew word translated ‘field’ has the meaning of a flat plain. Using the Bible to form our description of the word, "beasts of the field" include animals that move in when humans move out (Exodus 23:29), ‘wild asses’ (Psalm 104:11), ‘dragons and owls’ (Isaiah 43:20), animals that prey on sheep (Ezekiel 34:8), and a range of carnivores (Ezekiel 39:17). Therefore, we can conclude that beasts of the field were probably animals that today live in open country and/or who venture close to human habitation. Further, we can conclude that animals living exclusively in forests, jungles, mountains, wetlands, deserts, etc. wouldn't have been named as they don't meet the "field" criteria.
9. Conclusion: Adam spent far less time naming animals then most critics would like to suggest. When one excludes insects, animals living in the sea and all relevant animals on the basis of habitat, it would seem generous to allow for the naming of a thousand or so “kinds” of animals. For sake of argument, if there were a thousand animals to name and Adam named one every 30 seconds or so, the process would have been a relatively leisurely event, taking a little over 8 hours. All in all, a pleasant, normal day’s work in the Garden of Eden.
Labels: Adam, animals, christadelphian, creation, genesis