Religion and Theology

The article, which its title appears above written by M.C. Steenberg was a critical examination of the concept of Adam and Eve as children mainly in the context of Irenaeus anthropological understanding. The authors argument was anchored on the Irenaeus notion that Adam and Eve were created not as perfect man and woman as the first chapter of the Bible book of Genesis implies, but as child or infant.

According to Steenberg, despite the various intelligent comments on the work of Irenaeus with respect to Adam and Eve it was surprising that there was not much mention of his idea in the whole of the present Iranaen corpus. Steenberg categorically state that for Irenaeus, Adam and Eve were infants, not infantile children, not childlike.

Based on Steenbergs critical analysis of Irenaeuss anthropological notion of Adam and Eve, it appears that it is quite difficult to ascertain what Ireneus really meant for the word child as according to the author, Adam was as yet an infant, and as an infant infantile. Such distinction is revealing. To call a fully grown man childlike linguistically odd neither in English nor in Greek, but to call an adult a child is more qualified in Greek than in English (p. 5). The author himself recognizes the intricacies of the vocabulary but insist emphasis on vocabularies should be much attention because most often, these vocabularies are unreliable in view of the complex manuscript and translation history of the corpus (p. 6).

However, despite of the problem posed in history by unreliable vocabulary, Steenberg contends that the context of Irenaeus writings which talk about his anthropological view greatly outweighs that of terminology (p. 6) which supports a more basic, literal meaning of the Greek term. Steenberg argues that vocabularies alone cannot be taken to evidence concretely either a figurative or literal conception of Adam and Eve as Children. According to Steenberg, Irenaeus language of child and infant throughout his corpus is essentially offered as an observation of what he sees as a natural state (p. 7).

Steenberg apparently acknowledged the point which Iranaeus has established. That is, Adam and Eve were created as children rather than a grown up man and woman, who had not yet reached the age for sexual activity who thus required to adolescere before they could obey the command to multiplicari (p. 8). According to Steenberg, Irenaeus presentation of Adam and Eve as children is a presentation of the way things are, rather than the way they might have been, taking situations and events as literally as possible in light of Gnostic tendency to allegorize and mythologize to the extreme (p. 9).

Irenaeus literalism however does not at all roll out the symbolic scope of his discussion. Steenberg point out that it is clear that the use of Adam as symbolic of all mankind should be interpreted reciprocally which reflect that all humanity is seen to live out the story personified in him. It means that Adam and Eve as the representative of all created beings has undergone the process that each member of the human race has undergone. For Irenaeus, the symbolic value of creation account is bound up in its historicity, which according to Steenberg was the Gnostics continuously attempted to twist and distort. Steenberg recognized that this history set forth clearly and unambiguously, in express terms, in the sacred scripture (p. 10).

On the other hand, Steenberg also raises the idea that Irenaeus may have been talking of Adam and Eve as infants only in reference to their mental or social state.  That is, their minds are equivalent to that of a child, not the whole of their human person. In other words, they might have been created with adult bodies but with that of childrens mentality. According to Steenberg, the context of Irenaeus argument leaves room for less-physiologically-oriented interpretation. It means that the word childlikeness which Irenaeus held to be to condition of Adam and Eves mental state which was of any physical age (p. 11).

Again, Steenberg cited that there were significant passages in the Irenaean writings which seemed to suggest that Adam and Eve could not have been children in the literal sense. Steenberg cited that the Biblical scenario wherein, it depicts God talking with Adam and Eve in the garden of paradise. The implication of this conversation according to Steenberg is that it figured Adam as a man able to walk and talk and has the capacity to name all the animals in the garden. The argument then raised by Steenberg in this section was whether Irenaeus notion of infancy could stand against the context by which Adam was presented as able to speak, walk, talk, and work (p. 13). In this case, Steenberg cited the phrase endowed with reason that stands at odds with Irenaeus doctrine Adams infancy.

But even this, as Steenberg argues, was ineffective argument against Adams literal childhood, as according to Sternberg, infants maybe called rational beings in as much as they are members of the human race which is rational (p. 14). Overall, the article speaks of Irenaeus notion of Adam and Eves infancy in which Steenberg tested the notion using various arguments such as the phrase Adam walk and Talk, Adam was endowed with reason and so forth. Although Steenberg did not in favor of Irenaeus argument, he concluded, In Christ, Adam has grown from boy to man, and as Adam is the type of every human person, so does this growth become cosmic in its scope (p. 22).