Bible Proof that Adam and Eve were brown people - Black people

[Radrook]

If Adam & Eve were intended to live naked, it makes sense that they would have dark brown skins for protection from sunlight, especially given the Biblical location of Eden in present-day Iraq (Tigris & Euphrates).

Some have claimed that sunlight didn't beat down on the Earth's surface the way it does now due to a water canopy.
The Pre-flood Atmosphere | Genesis Park

 

[Radrook]

Hi, One thing we must remember is that we don't and can't know where Eden was. The world wide flood of Noahs time would have destroyed the garden and all hints of where it was.

The Bible clearly mentions four rivers that were associated with Eden, Two are still in existence, the Tigris and the Euphrates. The other two have been detected via satellites as have been displaced. This displacement or obliteration was due to the flood.

Genesis 2:8–14: The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden. . . . Now a river went out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it parted and became four riverheads. The name of the first is Pishon. . . . The name of the second river is Gihon. . . . The name of the third river is Hiddekel [Tigris]. . . . The fourth river is the Euphrates.

The Bible describes the area around the Garden in Genesis 2, even using recognizable place names such as Ethiopia. It mentions a spring in the Garden which parts into four major rivers, including the Euphrates. This has led many, including Bible scholars, to conclude that the Garden of Eden was somewhere in the middle eastern area known today as the Tigris-Euphrates River Valley, with its remains long ago vanishing.
Where Was the Garden of Eden Located? | The Institute for Creation Research

 

[-57]

The Bible clearly mentions four rivers that were associated with Eden, Two are still in existence, the Tigris and the Euphrates. The other two have been detected via satellites as have been displaced. This displacement or obliteration was due to the flood.

We often name rivers ...cities ...from old rivers and cities. For example, New York.

Perhaps you're right....but I think a world wide flood would have devistated all recollection of previous rivers.

 

[Radrook]

We often name rivers ...cities ...from old rivers and cities. For example, New York.

Perhaps you're right....but I think a world wide flood would have devistated all recollection of previous rivers.

Well, those rivers are mentioned-are they not? So we are being made aware of those pre-existing rivers as were all others who have read the Genesis account. Such knowledge could have been passed on through Noah, to Shem, to Abraham, to Israel to Moses.

 

[-57]

Well, those rivers are mentioned-are they not? So we are being made aware of those pre-existing rivers as were all others who have read the Genesis account. Such knowledge could have been passed on through Noah, to Shem, to Abraham, to Israel to Moses.

It would be impossible for the same rivers to exist. They would have been destroyed by the flood.
The names of the original rivers could have been passed on.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It would be impossible for the same rivers to exist. They would have been destroyed by the flood.
The names of the original rivers could have been passed on.

A natural drainage channel such as a river wouldn't be altered very much unless the topography was drastically changed. The location of 'Eden' was near sea level where the floodwaters would have been gentlest. This can be seen in tidal 'flats' where the land remains basically unchanged from year to year regardless of twice daily 'flooding' to a depth of many feet.

 

[Radrook]

In the USA every twentieth word in many casual conversations is either "black" or "white" or else "race" "pure" and "mixed! or "brown!" with an occasional spiteful, guttural "mutt!" thrown in.

It seems to be an obsessive, cultural, national pastime.

 

[Radrook]

It would be impossible for the same rivers to exist. They would have been destroyed by the flood.
The names of the original rivers could have been passed on.

The names of two of those rivers have been passed on, the Euphrates and Tigris. The names of the other two as well but they are only detectable only via satellite geographical surveying which shows the original course they took before the flood obliterated them.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Yeah...another thread promoting racialism.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Seeing as we all have our ancestry going back to Africa then, yes, our oldest ancestors, being sub-Saharan Africans, would have been very dark--black. Same as sub-Saharan Africans are today. A loss of melanin is a result of adaptation to environments with less UV exposure; this is why across the globe populations historically located near or on the equator have dark(er) skin than those who live further away from the equator who have light(er) skin.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Waggles]

God formed Adam from the dust of the ground. As far as I know, and as far back as people can remember, the dust of the ground has always been brown.

No - God probably used white china clay.

 

[Waggles]

Adam the red head - everything is now explained.

 

[Radrook]

Seeing as we all have our ancestry going back to Africa then, yes, our oldest ancestors, being sub-Saharan Africans, would have been very dark--black. Same as sub-Saharan Africans are today. A loss of melanin is a result of adaptation to environments with less UV exposure; this is why across the globe populations historically located near or on the equator have dark(er) skin than those who live further away from the equator who have light(er) skin.

-CryptoLutheran

I hope you realize that such an out of Africa view demands that we tag Moses, Jesus, and the Apostles as liars.

1 Peter 2:22 ►
New International Version
"He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth."

The biblical account doesn't say that mankind originated in Africa. The Garden of Eden was in the Middle East close to the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers. It clearly identifies Ham, the son of Noah as the progenitor of the black race and mankind had a long history on Earth prior to Ham's birth as we are clearly told in the Genesis account. Jesus and the apostles believed this as did Moses and al the other inspired Bible writers.

But according to you they were all duped? How is calling Jesus a deluded individual consistent with Christianity? Care to explain?

 

[ViaCrucis]

How is calling Jesus a deluded individual consistent with Christianity? Care to explain?

Since I'm not calling Jesus deluded then the rest of your question is rather moot.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Radrook]

Since I'm not calling Jesus deluded then the rest of your question is rather moot.

-CryptoLutheran

Well, if we say Africa and he says the Middle East, or if we say from animal to human when he says that we were created apart from the animals, then what indeed is Jesus being called if not delusional?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Well, if we say Africa and he says the Middle East, or if we say from animal to human when he says that we were created apart from the animals, then what indeed is Jesus being called if not delusional?

If you can find me somewhere where Jesus says, "Adam and Eve were two literal historical people and, literally, where everyone came from and they were in a literal garden located in Mesopotamia." then you might have something.

Jesus doesn't.

Jesus uses the story of Adam and Eve, absolutely, as part of His instruction and teaching; something a good teacher would do.

Your argument depends on the fact that Jesus expressly taught that Adam and Eve were literal people who lived in a literal garden, etc; but Jesus never expressly teaches anything like this, it is an assertion without substance.

I'll need a far better argument than your mere assertion.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Radrook]

If you can find me somewhere where Jesus says, "Adam and Eve were two literal historical people and, literally, where everyone came from and they were in a literal garden located in Mesopotamia." then you might have something.

Jesus doesn't.

Jesus uses the story of Adam and Eve, absolutely, as part of His instruction and teaching; something a good teacher would do.

Your argument depends on the fact that Jesus expressly taught that Adam and Eve were literal people who lived in a literal garden, etc; but Jesus never expressly teaches anything like this, it is an assertion without substance.

I'll need a far better argument than your mere assertion.

-CryptoLutheran

That is absolutely absurd!

All the prophets, Jesus and his Apostles spoke about the Genesis personages and locations and events as factual and historical and there is absolutely no indication and no justification to assume otherwise.


BTW
Going along with those who discredit the Bible by questioning its authenticity in such matters isn't in harmony with what a Christian is assigned to do.

 

[Speedwell]

That is absolutely absurd!

All the prophets, Jesus and his Apostles spoke about the Genesis personages and locations and events as factual and historical and there is absolutely no indication and no justification to assume otherwise.


BTW
Going along with those who discredit the Bible by questioning its authenticity in such matters isn't in harmony with what a Christian is assigned to do.

Nothing that ViaCrucis said discredits or questions the authenticity of scripture. You owe him an apology.

 

[Sammy-San]

Some have claimed that sunlight didn't beat down on the Earth's surface the way it does now due to a water canopy.
The Pre-flood Atmosphere | Genesis Park

Do you think the Aurora Borealis and Austrealis were in the pre flood atmosphere?

 

[Sammy-San]

If Adam & Eve were intended to live naked, it makes sense that they would have dark brown skins for protection from sunlight, especially given the Biblical location of Eden in present-day Iraq (Tigris & Euphrates).

Isn't it fair to say we don't know what Adam's race or skin color was? The bible doesn't tell us. It's speculation.