If Adam wasn't the first man, how does that affect The Fall and The Atonement?

[Saint Steven]

A fair number of Christians have opted for a more scientific view of origins.
Evolution, as apposed to Creationism. (basically)

Both sides have good arguments to support their position.
I find myself stuck in the middle somewhere. I see plenty of evidence for intelligent design in creation.
But the other side points to difficulties in the biblical narrative for origins.

Another aspect is the genealogies given. Especially the lineage of Christ.
But again, some see problems in the biblical narrative.

The biggest difficulty for me personally it what this does, or might do, to The Fall and The Atonement.
If Adam wasn't the first man, how does that affect The Fall and The Atonement?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

A fair number of Christians have opted for a more scientific view of origins.
Evolution, as apposed to Creationism. (basically)

Both sides have good arguments to support their position.
I find myself stuck in the middle somewhere. I see plenty of evidence for intelligent design in creation.
But the other side points to difficulties in the biblical narrative for origins.

Another aspect is the genealogies given. Especially the lineage of Christ.
But again, some see problems in the biblical narrative.

The biggest difficulty for me personally it what this does, or might do, to The Fall and The Atonement.
If Adam wasn't the first man, how does that affect The Fall and The Atonement?

This was the first question I ever asked as I seriously pondered over the meaning of Christianity, back when I initially became a Christian and read the Bible for the first time in 1986.

It's the unanswerable question. But without getting into a lengthy discussion involving all the sources/books and fields I've studied over the last few decades, my position is that Genesis is a prophetic writing, representational in its theological nature, and as such, it is still Sacred.

Also, I contextualize Genesis, encompassing as it does Creation and The Fall, as an expression of the Torah, a genealogical prelude of sorts, which alludes to the actual substance of Israelite history which many Jewish folks posit as residing within the Exodus account and not so much with Genesis itself.

This 'means' that Humanity is still "fallen" without a literal Adam, but fallen in a more general way, and still in need of reconciliation with the Lord through the salvific work which Jesus Christ has provided in fulfillment of the prophetic messages.

That's the short of it.

 

[PloverWing]

I'd say that looking around us, at the ways human society is messed up, and looking inside myself, at the ways I'm messed up, there is an awful lot about human beings that needs fixing, and we need God to step in and fix us. Thus, sin, and salvation from sin. I see Genesis 3 as a story that talks about how even though humans are wonderful, we're also broken, and the storyteller uses the characters of a man and a woman in a garden with a tree and a talking snake to describe the brokenness of humankind. The sin part of the story is still very true, even though I think the story itself is intended as fiction instead of history.

 

[Andrewn]

Evolution, as apposed to Creationism. (basically)

Theistic evolution is not opposed to Creationism. God designed evolution.

If Adam wasn't the first man, how does that affect The Fall and The Atonement?

Adam, regarded as the Representative of human nature, failed. Jesus, as the Representative of humanity, succeeded. All who are in Adam suffer eternal death. All who are in Christ inherit eternal life.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

A fair number of Christians have opted for a more scientific view of origins.
Evolution, as apposed to Creationism. (basically)

Also, keep in mind that some of our fellow Christians who are Theistic Evolutionists, like Francis Collins and Deborah Haarsma, consider themselves to be a 'form' of Creationists. So, the issues are a bit more complex than simply Evolution VS. Creationism.

Just a bit of info, brother Steven!

Both sides have good arguments to support their position.
I find myself stuck in the middle somewhere. I see plenty of evidence for intelligent design in creation.

And that's ok.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

A fair number of Christians have opted for a more scientific view of origins.
Evolution, as apposed to Creationism. (basically)

Both sides have good arguments to support their position.
I find myself stuck in the middle somewhere. I see plenty of evidence for intelligent design in creation.
But the other side points to difficulties in the biblical narrative for origins.

Another aspect is the genealogies given. Especially the lineage of Christ.
But again, some see problems in the biblical narrative.

The biggest difficulty for me personally it what this does, or might do, to The Fall and The Atonement.
If Adam wasn't the first man, how does that affect The Fall and The Atonement?

I believe Adam was the first to be made in God's image. The capability to have direct communion with God through His Holy Spirit. All other creatures, including other types of Hominins ,were not created with this ability. To continue, I also think this is why Cain was so affraid to be cast out among those that were not the " sons of God". Cains wife came from the " daughters of men". Anyway, my rationalizing. Blessings.

 

[Sorn]

Even if we evolved there would still have been a 1st man, the 1st true human man, although probably not visibly different than his immediate parents but yet in some crucial genetic way the 1st true human. Of course if we evolved then the 1st true human may have been a woman so there's that

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Adam, regarded as the Representative of human nature, failed. Jesus, as the Representative of humanity, succeeded. All who are in Adam suffer eternal death. All who are in Christ inherit eternal life

Yes, and while Adam may be figurative Jesus is more or less historical.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

A fair number of Christians have opted for a more scientific view of origins.
Evolution, as apposed to Creationism. (basically)

Both sides have good arguments to support their position.
I find myself stuck in the middle somewhere. I see plenty of evidence for intelligent design in creation.
But the other side points to difficulties in the biblical narrative for origins.

Another aspect is the genealogies given. Especially the lineage of Christ.
But again, some see problems in the biblical narrative.

The biggest difficulty for me personally it what this does, or might do, to The Fall and The Atonement.
If Adam wasn't the first man, how does that affect The Fall and The Atonement?

Many of the people who hold to these ideas also believe that there were humans on the earth prior to the creation of Adam and Eve. They existed outside of the garden and the children of Adam and Eve drew their spouses from those humans. By the time of the flood, the descendants of Adam and Eve had crossed with these pre-existent humans. And after the flood all of the Noah's descendants were infused with the blood of Adam and Eve. That blood lifted all men to the "race" of Adam and therefore owning the fall and eligible for the Atonement.

 

[Diamond7]

The biggest difficulty for me personally it what this does, or might do, to The Fall and The Atonement.
If Adam wasn't the first man, how does that affect The Fall and The Atonement?

We have to be very careful in Genesis because every word has a lot of meaning. In this case, we are talking about the Hebrew word: "neshamah" meaning breath of life. We see this in Genesis 2:7 "Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."

Of course, we know that the "dust of the ground" is what science calls "star stuff". (sagan-Tyson cosmos) Adam is what we call a food producer. The "man" we read about in Genesis 1:27 was a hunter-gather. There is a lot of history and science on how hunter gathers became food producers. They call this the neolithic revolution. "It is considered one of the most significant events in human history and is said to have laid the foundations for modern civilization." (chatbot) There are many many things that began with Adam. This was the beginning of civilization.

We know that all the books in the world would not be enough to explain this. The Harvard library has over 200,000 books that talk about the events that take place in the 17 verses of Genesis chapter one.

John 21:25 "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written."

"Haplogroup J-M172 is found mainly in the Fertile Crescent" (Wiki) This is the land given to Abraham and his descendants. Genesis 15:18 "On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants, I have given this land--from the river of Egypt to the great River Euphrates--"

"Y-chromosomal Aaron is the name given to the hypothesized most recent common ancestor of the patrilineal Jewish priestly caste known as Kohanim (singular "Kohen", also spelled "Cohen"). According to the traditional understanding of the Hebrew Bible, this ancestor was Aaron, the brother of Moses. (wiki)

While some early genetic studies were seen as possibly supporting the traditional biblical narrative, this view was subsequently challenged with some researchers arguing that the genetic evidence "refutes the idea of a single founder for Jewish Cohanim who lived in Biblical times."[1][2] However, recent studies have provided further support for the model of descent from a common ancestor who lived in the First Temple period by demonstrating that Kohanim from different Jewish communities form a "tight cluster" which is "specific to the Jewish Cohens".[3][4] (wiki)

The original scientific research was based on the hypothesis that a majority of present-day Jewish Kohanim share a pattern of values for six Y-STR markers, which researchers named the extended Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH).[5] Subsequent research using twelve Y-STR markers indicated that about half of contemporary Jewish Kohanim shared Y-chromosomal J1 M267, (specifically haplogroup J-P58, also called J1c3), while other Kohanim share a different ancestry, such as haplogroup J2a (J-M410).[6] The latest studies using single nucleotide polymorphic markers have further narrowed the results down to a single sub-branch known as J1-B877 (also known as J1-Z18271).[3][4]" (wiki)

Science (Biology) tells us a lot about Eden and the Fertile Crescent. They call this a biodiverse ecosystem. Of course, there are many Adams, Eves and Edens in Science. In the Bible, we are only talking about Ancient Mesopotamia where civilization began. Haplogroup J-M172

"Ashkenazi Jews—an ethnic group that includes physicist Albert Einstein, psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud and composer Gustav Mahler" (science American)

"Haplogroup J-M172 is a genetic marker found in the Y-chromosome. It is common among Ashkenazi Jews, as well as other populations in the Near East, North Africa, and Europe. Haplogroups are used in genetic genealogy to trace the ancestry and migration patterns of populations. By analyzing the frequency and distribution of Y-chromosome markers like J-M172, scientists can gain insights into the history and evolution of human populations." (Chatbot)

A Jewish Gene for Intelligence?

www.scientificamerican.com

​

 

[Saint Steven]

I'd say that looking around us, at the ways human society is messed up, and looking inside myself, at the ways I'm messed up, there is an awful lot about human beings that needs fixing, and we need God to step in and fix us. Thus, sin, and salvation from sin. I see Genesis 3 as a story that talks about how even though humans are wonderful, we're also broken, and the storyteller uses the characters of a man and a woman in a garden with a tree and a talking snake to describe the brokenness of humankind. The sin part of the story is still very true, even though I think the story itself is intended as fiction instead of history.

What about the genealogies of Jesus?

 

[Saint Steven]

Theistic evolution is not opposed to Creationism. God designed evolution.

What about the creation week as six days? (sun up/sundown)

Adam, regarded as the Representative of human nature, failed. Jesus, as the Representative of humanity, succeeded. All who are in Adam suffer eternal death. All who are in Christ inherit eternal life.

What about the genealogies of Jesus?

 

[Saint Steven]

Even if we evolved there would still have been a 1st man, the 1st true human man, although probably not visibly different than his immediate parents but yet in some crucial genetic way the 1st true human. Of course if we evolved then the 1st true human may have been a woman so there's that

The record in Genesis says that God created humankind.

 

[Saint Steven]

Yes, and while Adam may be figurative Jesus is more or less historical.

That's curious. Tell us more. Thanks.

And... What about the genealogies of Jesus?
Or is that what you meant by historic?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

What about the genealogies of Jesus?

Probably more theological intent than historical.

 

[Saint Steven]

Many of the people who hold to these ideas also believe that there were humans on the earth prior to the creation of Adam and Eve. They existed outside of the garden and the children of Adam and Eve drew their spouses from those humans. By the time of the flood, the descendants of Adam and Eve had crossed with these pre-existent humans. And after the flood all of the Noah's descendants were infused with the blood of Adam and Eve. That blood lifted all men to the "race" of Adam and therefore owning the fall and eligible for the Atonement.

Would that mean that there were humans outside of the Fall of humankind? (Adam's fall)

 

[Lost Witness]

Many of the people who hold to these ideas also believe that there were humans on the earth prior to the creation of Adam and Eve. They existed outside of the garden and the children of Adam and Eve drew their spouses from those humans. By the time of the flood, the descendants of Adam and Eve had crossed with these pre-existent humans. And after the flood all of the Noah's descendants were infused with the blood of Adam and Eve. That blood lifted all men to the "race" of Adam and therefore owning the fall and eligible for the Atonement.

The problem with that is,
It would be calling GOD a liar.
We know GOD isn't a liar.
Let's not speak of things that are in direct opposition to scripture.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Would that mean that there were humans outside of the Fall of humankind? (Adam's fall)

Those who hold to this see them as inheriting the fallen nature from Adams line.

 

[YeshuaFollower]

The record in Genesis says that God created humankind.

hello Saint Steven,

Yes the living GOD did create man, in his image. do you realize what that means? what is the purpose of this? Hints can be found in the book of JOHN chap 17, it is a pryer from jesus to OUR father, it takes times to absorb this and it is quite extraordinary.

personally, i am absolutely certain GOD created everything, all that is written by the will of GOD through time and many authors is true.

blessings,

Jff

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The problem with that is,
It would be calling GOD a liar.
We know GOD isn't a liar.
Let's not speak of things that are in direct opposition to scripture.

Not calling God a liar at all. Scripture is a collaboration of human mind and God's spirit. There is always room and need for parable, metaphor, and figurative language.