well, regardless of Mark's endearing quirks, I believe he still has a legitimate point. That being, how exactly is the divine mandates of Genesis 2 a "covenant?" I understand it to be more of a creator/creature distinctive, rather than an actual covenant. When God reveals his purposes in a covenant, the first real mention of any covenant is by God in Genesis 6:18 given to Noah and his family. Eventually, this covenant is completed in Genesis 9:9 where you have God laying down specific terms in relation to this covenant, ie, I will no more destroy the earth with water. This covenant is also called an everlasting covenant, meaning that God will never break this covenant. It is then sealed with the sign of a rainbow. Though there are some similarity in the outline to God's command to Adam in Genesis 2, I think one is hard pressed to declare that it is an acutal covenant being made. I believe that is Mark's contention, and I for one agree with him - heaven help me.

Fred

"Ah, sitting - the great leveler of men. From the mightest of pharaohs to the lowest of peasants, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" M. Burns