More than just Adam and Eve

[JulySheMustFly]

Is it possible that God created more humans than just Adam and Eve when he created the world? But the Bible only mentions that set because the story of our condition flows from their transgression.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Is it possible that God created more humans than just Adam and Eve when he created the world? But the Bible only mentions that set because the story of our condition flows from their transgression.

What is the Hebrew Bible about? --->the Hebrews, (it;s a trick question *grin*)
When Moses wants to tell the Hebrews where they came from what does he tell them? --->Gen 1-11
The bible doesn't talk about the chinese nor the mayans nor the incas either. why not?
Oftentimes when it uses the phrase "the whole earth" it means Israel Egypt to Mesopotamian.

it has a restricted domain of interest. that doesn't mean the rest of the globe is insignificant to God only that they are not necessary actors in the Biblical drama of redemption.

adam is placed into the garden of eden between the rivers of mesopotamian. there are already great cities around him. lots of people. but they are not the ancestors of the hebrews, adam is.

 

[JulySheMustFly]

What is the Hebrew Bible about? --->the Hebrews, (it;s a trick question *grin*)
When Moses wants to tell the Hebrews where they came from what does he tell them? --->Gen 1-11
The bible doesn't talk about the chinese nor the mayans nor the incas either. why not?
Oftentimes when it uses the phrase "the whole earth" it means Israel Egypt to Mesopotamian.

it has a restricted domain of interest. that doesn't mean the rest of the globe is insignificant to God only that they are not necessary actors in the Biblical drama of redemption.

adam is placed into the garden of eden between the rivers of mesopotamian. there are already great cities around him. lots of people. but they are not the ancestors of the hebrews, adam is.

That is what I was wondering. So, is this accurate to believe from a creationist point?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

That is what I was wondering. So, is this accurate to believe from a creationist point?

what i am describing is a very minority position.
it is not acceptable within my denomination for elders or pastors to believe. it is called either "old earth, young adam" or "two adams", i learned about it from a book called the origins solution and from a progressive creationist with a big online presence called Stephen Jones. googling will get you into both things.

the earliest work i can find on the topic was printed in the mid 17th C and is not available anywhere for interlibrary loan.

i think it defensible and it is discussed often on the ASA listserv because Dick Fisher is there, the author of the book. i've never met anyone other than the above proposing the idea.

the almost universal YECist belief is that Adam is the progenitor of all humanity, physically and genetically.

likewise all the OEC and PC's i've encountered online except S.Jones.

TE's seems to take Adam allegorically most commonly and not care about the discussion at all. only the most conservative seem to enter into the issue. Glenn Morton has another solution to the problem of adam. his website is: http://home.entouch.net/dmd/dmd.htm


so to answer your question: no.

 

[FreezBee]

So, is this accurate to believe from a creationist point?

But if so, what does it mean? Adam and Eve were only the ancestors of the Hebrews, so the fall only applies to the Hebrews? And the reversal of the fall by the sacrifice of Jesus only applies to the Hebrews?

- FreezBee

 

[JulySheMustFly]

But if so, what does it mean? Adam and Eve were only the ancestors of the Hebrews, so the fall only applies to the Hebrews? And the reversal of the fall by the sacrifice of Jesus only applies to the Hebrews?

- FreezBee

I don't know. I would think the larger question is if Adam was only the ancestor of the Hebrews then does it allow room for another god to have been the creator of other ethnicicties? It is a dangerous place to venture I think.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

But if so, what does it mean? Adam and Eve were only the ancestors of the Hebrews, so the fall only applies to the Hebrews? And the reversal of the fall by the sacrifice of Jesus only applies to the Hebrews?

- FreezBee

no, because Adam was the federal head of all people (either all people retroactively or all people from that point on) ...
so from Adam's fall onward, all souls created with original sin, because in Adam all fell.

essentially God covenanted with Adam in the place of all human beings. Adam lost innocence and gained a sinful spirit at war with God and all spirits created since have likewise been like him.

unless you are traducian, souls are created as needed, original sin is passed through the soul not the body.
if you are traducian you can explain your position better than i can. *grin*

 

[Dylan_Chica]

no, the bible says god created adam and eve and told them to have children and make the earth fruitful, they were the only human beings created by god directly.

 

[jeffweeder]

Thats right dylan c, and what does the rest of scripture say-:jesus quoting gen 1:27 and 2:24 in mark 10:6-8
Pauls teaching in 1 cor 11:8-9, 11-12; 1tim 2:13- is he not taking genesis seriously?
Even in 1 cor 15: 21-22; 45, dealing with the ressurection of all things , he makes ref.
I'll even throw in what god wrote with his own hand, regarding the 4th commandment, the seventh day he rested, FOR IN 6 DAYS GOD...................SO we know to take these ten literally....dont we

 

[HypnoToad]

There is no Scriptural basis for thinking there were any people created other than Adam and Eve. Eve receives her name because she was mother of ALL living.

Further, Scripture CLEARLY shows that Adam is NOT the ancestor of only the Hebrews. Read the geneologies in Genesis, particularly what nations arise from Noah's children. Noah & his sons were all descendants of Adam, yet they gave rise to many nations, not simply the Hebrews - who are descendants of Shem (one of Noah's three sons).

 

[rmwilliamsll]

There is no Scriptural basis for thinking there were any people created other than Adam and Eve. Eve receives her name because she was mother of ALL living.

Further, Scripture CLEARLY shows that Adam is NOT the ancestor of only the Hebrews. Read the geneologies in Genesis, particularly what nations arise from Noah's children. Noah & his sons were all descendants of Adam, yet they gave rise to many nations, not simply the Hebrews - who are descendants of Shem (one of Noah's three sons).

clearly is obvious not the right word to use, for
where are the chinese, the mayans, the incas?
australian aboriginals, north american indians, aztecs etc. just silence.

Cain was afraid of reprisals from whom?
who did Cain marry?
how did he build a city in just a few years?

i could go on, but these problems have been well known in the text of Gen 2-5 for hundreds of years.

curiously the title is mother of all living.
living what?
why restrict it to people? like you already have, it is Zoe, all living, not all living humans.
why all people? that is not implicit in the title.
who is the Hebrew Scriptures addressed to--all people? why?

the name adam is itself a complex pun, does that mean Adam was red earth?

not only that, but a universal, global flood starts all the problems over again only a thousand to 1500 years later.

what does the word translated as nations mean? it is the basis of our word-ethnos.

 

[SryUrNotAgod]

Forgive me brothers and sisters if I may be so bold as to offer a fair warning in discussions such as these.

I fear this may fall under God's warnings:

3As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, 4nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith. 5But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.
6For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, 7wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions.
1 Timothy 1:3-7

14Remind them of these things, and charge them before God not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers. 15Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. 16But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness, 17and their talk will spread like gangrene.
2 Timothy 2:14-17

3If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, 4he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, 5and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.
1 Timothy 1:3-5

and so on...

Jesus is called the second Adam and the fall of Adam is utterly essential to the bible and to salvation. As part of His body we should be building up eachother's faith not sparking unnecessary arguments that may lead people to unnecessarily questioning things they shouldn't be and weakening their faith. We get enough of this from those who hate God, as those who love Him let us not shoot ourselves in the foot.

-Peace
David

 

[HypnoToad]

clearly is obvious not the right word to use, for
where are the chinese, the mayans, the incas?
australian aboriginals, north american indians, aztecs etc. just silence.

Just because the Bible doesn't go that far down the lines of Noah's other two sons doesn't mean those nations were created separately.

Cain was afraid of reprisals from whom?

His brothers, sisters, cousins, etc.

who did Cain marry?

A sister, niece, cousin. Close-relative marriage wasn't forbidden until Moses' time. Abraham married his half-sister, which was never suggested as sinful for Abraham to do.

how did he build a city in just a few years?

Show me where Scripture says how big this "city" was and how many people lived there. What they called "cities" back then are usually more what we think of as "settlements" or "villiages". I think you a assuming something much bigger than what the text says.

i could go on, but these problems have been well known in the text of Gen 2-5 for hundreds of years.

"Well-known" perhaps, but not well-reasoned.

curiously the title is mother of all living.
living what?
why restrict it to people? like you already have, it is Zoe, all living, not all living humans.

???

What? You think it suggests she's the mother of all animals as well??

why all people? that is not implicit in the title.
who is the Hebrew Scriptures addressed to--all people? why?

If you're implying that "all living" refers to just Hebrews, again, the geneologies of Noah's children show that is not the case.

the name adam is itself a complex pun, does that mean Adam was red earth?

He was formed from the ground, wasn't he.

not only that, but a universal, global flood starts all the problems over again only a thousand to 1500 years later.

Your point?

what does the word translated as nations mean? it is the basis of our word-ethnos.

Again, the point of that question is ... ?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

f you're implying that "all living" refers to just Hebrews, again, the geneologies of Noah's children show that is not the case.


i never said Adam is just the progenitor of the Hebrew, i said Adam is the progenitor of the Hebrews. notice how you put the subtle "just" in there. He is the eponymous ancestor of all the Hebrews. Plus lots of other middle eastern peoples. but not the chinese, nor aboriginals nor incas nor aztecs nor mayans, for they were already in their homelands when God created Adam.

 

[LoG]

f you're implying that "all living" refers to just Hebrews, again, the geneologies of Noah's children show that is not the case.


i never said Adam is just the progenitor of the Hebrew, i said Adam is the progenitor of the Hebrews. notice how you put the subtle "just" in there. He is the eponymous ancestor of all the Hebrews. Plus lots of other middle eastern peoples. but not the chinese, nor aboriginals nor incas nor aztecs nor mayans, for they were already in their homelands when God created Adam.

That would mean those races were not in the image of God and therefore not truly human from a theological perspective and maybe even from a scientific one.
A new can of worms.

 

[philN]

Well, even if you were to take a completely literal interpretation of Genesis, 1:27 says that God created male and females in his image. However, Adam does not enter the picture, however, until chapter 2, which could very well mean that other people were created before Adam and Eve.

Now, the fact that Adam is the same Hebrew word for ground, and the fact that Hebrew literature is characterized by storytelling and mythology to paint pictures of greater truths leads me to believe that the Genesis account is mythopoetic in nature. The implications of this are that elements of this mythical account ended up becoming fact in the person of Christ (ironically, C.S. Lewis, whom most Christians idolize, held this belief and outlines it in his essay "Myth Becomes Fact" -- something not many Lewis fans may realize).

You also need to understand that the bible was written for a specific people at a specific time. That is not to say that it is not still important, but that the old testament was written to a Jewish nation who thinks completely differently than we do today in western culture. We look at things as black and white -- if two passages claim two different things, one must be wrong and one must be right. However, the Jewish people used a type of block logic, where two different things can be completely true, because it is the theme or the concept that is really important.

For example, in Matthew, the author gives the geneology of the Jesus from the side of Joseph to show how he is related to David. The problem with this is that because Jesus was born of a virgin, he really did not have any of that royal blood in him -- he was not a blood relation of Joseph or David or Abraham. However, because Matthew is writing to the Jewish people about Christ as the King of the Jews, he saw it fitting to include this information in there. See how it is the theme that is important, not specifically the black-and-white facts?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

That would mean those races were not in the image of God and therefore not truly human from a theological perspective and maybe even from a scientific one.
A new can of worms.

criticize ideas for what they say, not what you think they say. I was clear that human beings were created with the "imago dei" several thousand years(maybe 150K years) before the specific Adam of Gen 2.
this specific Adam is the progenitor of the Hebrews, or the first man to walk with God, to covenant with God, the federal head.
not even the first religious man, for burials and burial goods are found back maybe 200K years.

 

[HypnoToad]

f you're implying that "all living" refers to just Hebrews, again, the geneologies of Noah's children show that is not the case.


i never said Adam is just the progenitor of the Hebrew, i said Adam is the progenitor of the Hebrews. notice how you put the subtle "just" in there. He is the eponymous ancestor of all the Hebrews. Plus lots of other middle eastern peoples. but not the chinese, nor aboriginals nor incas nor aztecs nor mayans, for they were already in their homelands when God created Adam.

Where are you getting your timeline from?

 

[HypnoToad]

Well, even if you were to take a completely literal interpretation of Genesis, 1:27 says that God created male and females in his image.

No, it does NOT say "male and females" - it says "male and female He created them". If there's one male, and one female, together that would be a "them".

However, Adam does not enter the picture, however, until chapter 2, which could very well mean that other people were created before Adam and Eve.

Where do you get the idea the the "male" of ch.1 is not Adam?

For example, in Matthew, the author gives the geneology of the Jesus from the side of Joseph to show how he is related to David. The problem with this is that because Jesus was born of a virgin, he really did not have any of that royal blood in him -- he was not a blood relation of Joseph or David or Abraham. However, because Matthew is writing to the Jewish people about Christ as the King of the Jews, he saw it fitting to include this information in there. See how it is the theme that is important, not specifically the black-and-white facts?

Jesus was still a LEGAL heir of Joseph, and would still inherit David's line.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Where do you get the idea the the "male" of ch.1 is not Adam?

the adam in Gen 1 is generic, male and female.
the Adam in Gen2-5 is much more specific, from the puns on his name to the historical narrative framework.
there is no necessary connection.