0051 Hoffmeier next turns to the stories, starting with Adam and Eve.

Genesis 2:10-14 places Eden in Mesopotamia during the wet Neolithic (around 7800 years ago), when four rivers enter the newly-filled Persian Gulf.

0052 To me, the stories of the Garden of Eden associate to the first singularity.

From a scientific standpoint, the first singularity starts with the appearance of a speech-alone talking culture, the Ubaid of southern Mesopotamia.  The dynamics are discussed in The First Singularity and Its Fairy Tale Trace.  The melding of two cultures, one land-loving Neolithic and the other coast-loving Mesolithic, must have taken generations.  The routinization of pidgin, followed by its transformation into a fully linguistic creole, requires more than one generation.

0053 Yet, as typical of fairy tales, the names of actual people get entangled in memories of what happened.  Clearly, something happened.  It happened to real people.

0054 The artistry of the Stories of Adam and Eve is remarkable, especially when the nature of the first singularity is not disregarded.

For example, a talking serpent, who suddenly appears in the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and ends up crawling on the ground like a snake named “Desire”, testifies to the character of the transition.  The serpent has no hands.  It cannot talk in hand-speech talk.  It can only perform speech-alone talk.

0055 Hoffmeier dwells on Genesis 6:1-4, concerning the sons of God and the daughters of men.

Literary analysis suggests that the Nephilim episode relates to Noah’s flood in the same way that the Tower of Babelrelates to Abraham’s calling.

0056 In this, both point to periods of increasing contradictions within established paradigms, the final period of a cycle… er… genre.

0057 Hoffmeier considers the story of Noah’s flood.  It has a literary structure common to Semitic civilizations.  Typically, the structure goes ABCB’A’, where B’ and A’ mirror B and A.  Noah’s flood story, ABC…P…C’B’A’, contains 16 steps. 

0058 On top of that, during the past three centuries of the Age of Ideas, archaeologists unearth cuneiform-bearing clay tablets from long-buried libraries of ancient cities.  Some of the tablets tell a flood tale almost identical to the story of Noah’s flood.

0059 What does this imply, concerning the genres in Gen 1-11?To me, this implies a deep coherence between an elite Sumerian tradition and Abraham’s ancestors.  The idea is dramatically envisioned in the masterwork, An Archaeology of the Fall.  

Gen 1-11 in an insider’s tale about the rise and the fall of Sumerian civilization.

0060 James Hoffmeier concludes, by expressing the conviction that the entire Bible, including Genesis 1-11, intend to portray real events.  Therefore, the genre of Gen 1-11 is history and theology.

0061 These comments rely on the hypothesis of the first singularity, where a change in the way humans talk, from hand-speech to speech-alone talk, constitutes a transition so fundamental that our current Lebenswelt is not the same as the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.

To me, this implies that the stories of Adam and Eve are fairy tales about the initiation and early development of our current Lebenswelt of unconstrained social complexity.

0062 The first singularity initiates cycles of failure, reorientation, paradigm implementation, and response to contradictions inherent in the established paradigm.  Each cycle expresses its own genre.  Each cycle lasts for 16 generations (that is, about 400 years).  Each cycle brings the Ubaid further into the rewards and losses of increasing social differentiation.

A similar spiraling appears in Gen 1-11.  For example, the stories of Cain and Abel are a little less dreamy than the stories of Adam and Eve.  Lamech’s attitude is way more arrogant than Cain’s.

0063 The primeval history serves a witness to the consequences of the first singularity.

In this sense, Hoffmeier is on target.  Gen 1-11 is history and theology.

0064 In chapter two, Gordon H. Wenham views Gen 1-11 as protohistory.

He starts with the genealogies.

Even though the narratives are difficult to classify as genre, the genealogies are not.

0065 Wenham proposes a thought experiment.

Clearly, the view from within, the author’s point of view, would not assign the classifier, “genre”, to portions of the text.  The classification comes from the outside, from the reader’s point of view.

So, how does the reader, on the outside, enter the thought-world of the author, on the inside?

0066 This thought experiment associates to a two-level interscope, which is discussed in A Primer on Sensible and Social Construction.

For content, in the normal-context of the author’s world_3a, the Biblical text_2a emerges from (and situates) the potential of ‘the insider’s witness’_1a.

For situation, in the normal-context of the reader’s world_3b, an interpretation of the Biblical text_2b emerges from (and situates) the potential of ‘insights into the revelation of what happened’_1b.

0067 Here is a picture.

0068 Where does identification of genre enter into the previous diagram?

Genre introduces perspective.

Genre may serve as an ordering principle_1c.

0069 Here is a picture.

0070 If I look at the virtual nested form in the realm of possibility (the column of elements in firstness), I see this:

genre_1c( insights for reader_1b( Biblical witness_1a))

The normal context of genre_1c virtually brings insights for the reader_1b into relation with the potential of Biblical witness_1a.