This is an assumption, and as such is bad exegesis, and this bad exegesis colors the rest of his theology.
The truth is, he does not know, any more than anybody else, what the pre-lapsarian plan for the earth looked like. He ASSUMES it meant have families, GOVERNMENTS, create art -- but that is an assumption, mainly because that is the only sort of culture we know. Now. After the Fall.
When you cannot separate your own assumptions from what the biblical text actually says you cannot avoid error.
Talk about "bad exegesis" and errorist assumptions!
You actually think you can get away with saying, "he does not know, any more than anybody else, what the pre-lapsarian plan for the earth looked like. He ASSUMES it meant have families..."?
Hey, Gen 1:28 and 2:24 are pre-fall purposes clearly outlined in Scripture:
"Be fruitful and increase in number." (Gen. 1:28)
"...a man will leave his father & mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." (Gen. 2:24)
Jesus Himself sanctioned Gen. 2 when he said: "Haven't you read that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'. They are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together let no one separate." (Matt 19:4-6)
So I ask you the same question Jesus asked, "Haven't you read...?" What's this gobbly-goop about whether or not the culture of families was intended within God's plan for the earth?