Pre-Adamite Doctrine, History and Teaching

[Notedstrangeperson]

Your first link (Indo-European Invasions) is somewhat suspicious:

From Chapter 1:

In Egypt, as will be shown, the Black and White races shared what was virtually an identical geographic location along the banks of the Nile River - yet despite this the ancient White Egyptians produced a civilization which is still a marvel of world history​

- To state the obvious, the ancient Egyptians weren't white.
- He also said homo erectus wasn't an ancestor of white people (incorrect, he's the ancestor of all hominids) ...
- That the Neanderthals weren't related to white people (incorrect, both white and asian people have Neanderthal genes - although interestingly Africans don't) ...
- And that Cro-Magnon was the first white person (incorrect, they were an early form of homo sapiens).

Not a great source. Your link to Wikipedia is slightly better but it's talking about the spread of people from the Middle East to northern Europe and India. I was asking for evidence of Scandinavians coming down to India.

 

[theWaris1]

Ah, they were the wrong type of white. Gotcha. Also, I pointed out earlier that the 'Aryans' of India were a Nazi myth.

Indians and Iranians still speak of their Aryan descendants. Indians acknowledge that their once was many White Aryans in the land who have mixed. The few White people there are on the top rung of the caste system.

 

[theWaris1]

If it really must be repeated, the disciples wanted this woman to be sent away, Christ confronted the disciples attitutued towars this unlean gentile woman by declaring what great faith she had, so great in fact that her daughter was healed. Of course those with a racial agenda will not see this far into the text.


Again context eludes, or is simply ignored by, those with a racial agenda. This is specifically about daughters with inheritance, other daughters were not restricted in this way.

I don't have a racial agenda.
I lean towards British Irsaelism and they accept ALL people but do believe that part of the lost tribes settled in England and the kingly lineage of David carried on there.
You reading into this something that isn't there.

The scripture does not reveal what you've said in anyway. You just like to think you know the answers?


Again you read into it what you want and it is you that ignores the content. The content shows you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[theWaris1]

theWaris1: Thanks for the explanation but I'm still a bit fuzzy on the issue. So do British Israelism followers believe the British are one of the lost tribes of Israel, but they also believe of all races and nations people can become Christians?

Yes. The link I sent you on CAI which is British Israelism declares that they do accept everyone. They believe the kingly lineage of David carried on in Ireland/Scotland/England.. The signs are all there.



A jewish guy named Yair David points out the lost tribes as White people. Look see www.britam.org/


All prophecies to Abraham were fulfilled by none other than White folk. One major prophecy is that Abrams seed would rule the gateways of the Sea. It's undeniable that White men have ruled the Gateways of the Seas for several thousand years. Jews have never ruled the Seas or fulfilled any prophecy to Abram.
Christ told Jews that if they were of Abraham then they would do the works of Abraham. They haven't and they aren't. (the great deception/mystery)


The scriptures reveals that Edomites took over Hebron and plundered Jerusalem when Judah was taken to Babylon.

2ng king 16 reveals Jews were living in Elath(Edom) on the Red Sea while Judah ruled Jersusalem and Judea. Assyrians were allies of Judah and attacked the Jews and ran them out of Elath.

the 12th book (2nd Kings)is the first mention of a Jew ever.


another clue.
Num 1:18 And they assembled all the congregation together on the first day of the second month, and they declared their pedigrees after their families, by the house of their fathers, according to the number of the names, from twenty years old and upward, by their polls.

Modern Jews have it backwards and claim the Mothers line make one a Jew. So be it, they are not Judah or Hebrews.

Not really. Joseph was the descendant of King David but he was not the physical father of Jesus, hence he would not have inherited his 'pure blood'. As far as I know Mary's ancestry isn't mentioned at all.

Mary's ancestry was important and his human blood came from Mary. He was accepted as an adopted son of Joseph as Kings

Jesus wasn't a Jew? Now that is certainly incorrect.

Find one scriptrue that says Jesus was a Jew.
No don't bother looking. You won't find it.

Pontus Pilate said Chris was a Galilean and not a Judean or falsely called Jew. Examine the Greek words and you will see that JEWs and Judean is confused. They were improperly translated as the same but they weren't the same. 2nd Kings 16 will reveal Judah and Jews are two distinctly different peoples.



"Son of man, thy brethren, the men of thy Kindred, and all of the House of Israel wholly, are they unto whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, "GET YOU (ISRAEL) FAR FROM THE LORD; UNTO US IS THIS LAND (JUDEA) GIVEN IN POSSESSION." (Ezekiel 11:15)

The inhabitants of Judea stole the land and told the Israelites to stay away for this is their land now.

Idumeans/Edomites

(Ezekiel 36:5)
"Therefore, thus saith the LORD GOD, surely in the fire of my Jealousy have I spoken against the residue of the heathen, and against all IDUMEA, (IDUMEAN JEW-the chiefest of whom was HEROD, known as KING OF THE JEWS.") WHICH HAVE APPIOINTED MY LAND INTO THEIR POSSESSION, with the joy of all their heart with despiteful minds, to cast it out for a prey."




A promise to Abraham:

The seed of Israel was to become "A nation, and a company of nations."
The UK and her cubs is the only company of nations in the history of the world. True commonwealth of 53 states.

Gen 35: 10-1. ISRAEL was to be sent to the "Isles afar off." (Britain)


King David was to have his descendants ruling as king for Ever. Only Irish/Scots/English have had kings since Zedikiahs days. Irish had kings sinc Zeddikiah and until after christ was born. The harp of David is all over Ireland which was called Ibernia early on and changed to Hebineria by Rome. Iber/Eber is where Hebrew was derived. Sea of Galilee today is called Tiberias, Greek "Ias" means belonging to Tiber

The story of Judahs son of the red hand of Zarah/Pharez is completed in Ireland. The breach of the contract was fixed there(Prophecy)



Hebrew symbols are all over this flag.
The Golden Crown came from the royal line of David and of course the Star of David. The Cross was the last letter in old Hebrew and meant Completion.


Irish coat of Arms has the Steer of Napthali and Lion of Judahs. These aren't be accident. The Harp of David, Red hand of Zarah(Judah), Golden Crown of israel.

The Scotish and Enligsh Coat of Arms has the Union of Jacob on it. Which is the Unicorn of Joseph and Judahs Lion. The royal crown is symbolic of Israel. There are numerous signs.



X And t or cross were the way the last letter of Hebrew and Phoenician were written, these two letters were placed together to form the Union Jack(Flag of the Union of Jacob). These 2 letters were used in the OT to mark a mark of God on the foreheads of his people for protection.

The Lion and Unicorn is the two sticks coming together mentioned in scripture with the harp of David. The Lion of the tribe of Judah is on top representing Christ as ruler.


While British may not have came from Hebrew it does mean Covenant people in Hebrew.



They claim there are about 15 million Jews today and
there are over a billion White folk and can't be numbered.

Hos 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered;

The world has been blessed through Britain & her cubs. Even the gospel went out from Britain for 2 thousands years when they was no such place called Israel(1948).
Britain has been



Irish and Pheonician are almost identical.
All languages change over time.
Hebrew and Pheonician were similar.


PHOENICIAN OF PLAUTUS:
Byth lym mo thym nociothii nel ech an ti daisc machon

Ys i do iebrim thyfe lyth chy lya chon temlyph ula.

EARLY IRISH-CELTIC:
Beth liom' mo thime nociaithe, niel ach an ti dairie mae coinne

Is i de leabhraim tafach leith, chi lis con teampluibh ulla.


So many signs .........

Perhaps I shouldn't but I find the squabble between you and theWaris1 amusing. I find his arguments (marginally) less ridiculous than yours but all this nonsense about nationalism and race seem daft to me. Country and colour is of little revelance to Christianity.

But the historical values are great and they prove Prophecy that were fulfilled which is very interesting to me.

 

[theFijian]

Lol still on ignore am I?

''The original hebrew in Lev 18:23, 20:15, and Ex 22:19 is "bĕhemah" translated into animal or beast because that's what it means:
bĕhemah: 1) beast, cattle, animal, a) beasts (coll of all animals), b) cattle, livestock (of domestic animals) c) wild beasts''
==============

What cattle or animals wear sackloth and cry?

''But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that [is] in their hands.'' - Jonah 3: 8

More lols I love how selectively quote verses and not surprisingly the context disproves your own point.

Jonah 3:7,8 - By the decree of the king and his nobles: "Do not let people or animals, herds or flocks, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. 8 But let people and animals be covered with sackcloth"

This is the King of Nineveh speaking to his own people....why would he need to differentiate between Adamites and non-Adamites? Your racist agenda is marvelously ripped apart by the very texts you are trying to use to support it.

Talk about who follows allegory...

The beasts are other races. Even Jewish sources prove this -

"There are many kinds among Israel that are called cattle and beasts.
One is from the side of the serpent and another from the side of idolatrous nations, who are like animals and wild beasts."
- The Zohar: 2 Beresheet a29

Zechariah 8:10 -

''For before those days there was no wage for man or any wage for beast''

--- what kind of animal gets paid?

Exodus 19: 13 -

''There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether [it be] beast or man''

- What animals have ''hands''?


Isaiah 43:20 - "The beasts (Chay) of the field shall honor me..."

What animals honer people????

Please answer. Remember you claim to read not allegorically don't you?

SO WHAT ANIMALS:

- Have hands
- can cry
- honor people
- get paid
- wear sackloth

Good luck answering. I'm sure though suddenly with these passages you will claim they are non literal and 'symbolic'.

Lol you are so simple that you cannot comprehend that not all of the bible is historical narrative, some of it is and some of it isn't and some of it is poetic/allegorical (also demonstrated by your childish attempt to catch out TEs here, for some reason you never returned to that thread). You think that because a word is used literally in one part of scripture it must be used in the same way wherever it is appears. You really ought to give up on this exegesis stuff, you suck at it.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Indians and Iranians still speak of their Aryan descendants. Indians acknowledge that their once was many White Aryans in the land who have mixed. The few White people there are on the top rung of the caste system.

Again, the caste system is based on class, not race. Indeed the Hindu word 'Arya' simply means a person of high-caste. Granted the two may look very similar but nevertheless high-caste Indians are Indians, not Caucasians. Also keep in mind they bear a resemblance to a small group of Caucasians - they look more like Scandinavians than Spaniards.

Mary's ancestry was important and his human blood came from Mary. He was accepted as an adopted son of Joseph as Kings

Perhaps her ancestry was important but it's not mentioned in the Bible at all. The female line rarely is.

Find one scriptrue that says Jesus was a Jew.
No don't bother looking. You won't find it.

Are you kidding?

On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise him, he was named Jesus, the name the angel had given him before he had been conceived. Luke 2:21
Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?”, “Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied. Matthew 27: 11
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. John 8:31
“I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. John 18:20
Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, “In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out.” Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. One day the evil spirit answered them, “Jesus I know, and I know about Paul, but who are you? Acts 19:13-15

(NIV '84)​

​

He was circumcised, he called himself 'King of the Jews', he preached to Jews in public, he preached privately in synagogues, and early Jews drove out evil spirits in his name. It's pretty safe to guess Jesus' religion.

So do British Israelism followers believe the British are one of the lost tribes of Israel, but they also believe of all races and nations people can become Christians?

Yes. The link I sent you on CAI which is British Israelism declares that they do accept everyone. They believe the kingly lineage of David carried on in Ireland/Scotland/England.. The signs are all there.​

This somewhat removes the racist side of the Christian Identity movement - which I'm glad about - but I'm still rather suspicious about British Israelism.

I get the feeling it's supporters twist both Biblical and natural history to fit their views. The arguments you have personally used are often incorrect too. Earlier you sent me a link about a very old skeleton found it America, and the site it came from claimed it was Caucasian. This is untrue, it was cro-magnon, an early form of homo sapiens, and it's difficult (if not impossible) to judge his race. And saying Jesus wasn't a Jew? Come on now ...​

It all seems irrelevent anyway. Jesus stated his people were the ones who followed him, regardless of race or nation.​

 

[theWaris1]

Again, the caste system is based on class, not race. Indeed the Hindu word 'Arya' simply means a person of high-caste. Granted the two may look very similar but nevertheless high-caste Indians are Indians, not Caucasians. Also keep in mind they bear a resemblance to a small group of Caucasians - they look more like Scandinavians than Spaniards.

I only know what a guy from India was saying about his people and it matters not to me.

Perhaps her ancestry was important but it's not mentioned in the Bible at all. The female line rarely is.

only the Jews acknowledge the female as the lineage which is backwards of the Hebrew ways.

Are you kidding?

On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise him, he was named Jesus, the name the angel had given him before he had been conceived. Luke 2:21
Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?”, “Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied. Matthew 27: 11
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. John 8:31
“I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. John 18:20
Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, “In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out.” Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. One day the evil spirit answered them, “Jesus I know, and I know about Paul, but who are you? Acts 19:13-15

(NIV '84)​

He was circumcised, he called himself 'King of the Jews', he preached to Jews in public, he preached privately in synagogues, and early Jews drove out evil spirits in his name. It's pretty safe to guess Jesus' religion.

no I aint kidding and you have not provided any proof.
You are digging but with little actual scriptural proof.

Not one of these says he was a Jew. I don't know what version of Matthew 27: 11 you are using but I have three versions that don't say, "Yes".

But.. And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.
the Literal translation is simply "thou sayest".

the word Jew here comes from the Greek word = Ioudaios

Iouda - ias = Juda - ias

Ias means belonging to, a place.. As in Judea


Judea and Jew are not the same and should not be used the same.
they have been confused by those who didn't know any better or those who deliberately wanted to deceive the masses.

Jesus is to be King of Judea


Ioudaia = Judaea 45 times in KJV
Ioudaias =- Should be Judean And Not JEW



Luk 23:4 And Pilate said unto the chief priests, and the multitude, `I find no fault in this man;'
Luk 23:5 and they were the more urgent, saying--`He doth stir up the people, teaching throughout the whole of Judea(Ioudaia) --having begun from Galilee--unto this place.'
Luk 23:6 And Pilate having heard of Galilee, questioned if the man is a Galilean,
Luk 23:7 and having known that he is from the jurisdiction of Herod, he sent him back unto Herod, he being also in Jerusalem in those days.

Jesus was a Galilean so Pilate sent him to Herod who was over Galilee at the time. Galileans and Judeans were a world a part and even sounded different as noted in
Mark 14:70 & Luke 22:9.

the word Jew is confused today.
Being circumcised was of the religion of Abraham,Moses and the Hebrews and not necessarily of Jews who were not Hebrews. Confused and tricked. I grew up on the same false teachings.

Study to show theyself approved and you shall see.


2nd kings 16 proves Jews were not of Judah.

This somewhat removes the racist side of the Christian Identity movement - which I'm glad about - but I'm still rather suspicious about British Israelism.​

you got it backwards. British Israelism is open to all people. CI is bad racist and deceived. Ci is a cult..

I get the feeling it's supporters twist both Biblical and natural history to fit their views. The arguments you have personally used are often incorrect too. Earlier you sent me a link about a very old skeleton found it America, and the site it came from claimed it was Caucasian. This is untrue, it was cro-magnon, an early form of homo sapiens, and it's difficult (if not impossible) to judge his race. And saying Jesus wasn't a Jew? Come on now ...​

no don't talk about your feelings. Feelings do not make real arguments. Leave those out.
I provided you with firm scriptural proof. I don't think you read all that I've written. You just cast it aside and murmur against it.. So be it. I wasted my time with you.
Typisch


Don't say my points are invalid but refute them one at a time. I don't know about the Skulls found in America. I only know it was headline news a while back.
I didn't search good links because it really don't matter to me.

it really don't matter if you see the historical Israel has been replanted or not. But Jews are not the real Hebrew/Israel and that does matter.. In Gods time it will come out.


Rev 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews(judeans/Ioudaias), and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Rev 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews(Judeans=Ioudaias), and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Who has Synagogues? Jews do. No other

It all seems irrelevent anyway. Jesus stated his people were the ones who followed him, regardless of race or nation.​

It may be irrelevant but the prophecies being fulfilled are amazing and anyone that doesn't think so is a bore.

Jesus came back for the Lost Sheep of the house of Israel, he said twice. And he sent his apostles to these people and you think it's all irrelevant?

Most women don't seem to care as much about prophecy as men do and that would make a difference here.



​

 

[Research4]

I quit the forum. However to clarify about BI i'll post this finally here.

I contacted a BIWF official about their stance on race and i can confirm (as i said) British Israelites are against intermarriage.

theWaris1 is a troll/poser who is toying around with something he doesn't have a clue about.

You can't be married to a non-white (like theWaris1 is) and be BI.

British Israelites are against intermarriage. Please go to EnsignMessage.com or the British Israelite World-Federation and read their articles on race there. British Israelites are against multiracialism/multiculturalism. theWaris1 is a poser who is wrecking our movement by claiming BI is open to anyone and his wife is not white but Amerindian.

Feel free to continue this thread and debate theWaris1. Please though don't consider him BI. He does not represent the BI movement. He is a poser. I've been a British Israelite since i was 16, no BI member i have ever known promotes race mixing or intermarriage like thewaris1, we firmly stand against it - a core tenet of BI is geneaological purity. His account is clearly a fake or as i said he's a poser/confused.

The reason i post this - is because theWaris1 is no authority on BI. He knows nothing about it and is discrediting our movement. So if you further want to debate him - that's great. Just don't consider him BI. He's not.

 

[theWaris1]

I quit the forum. However to clarify about BI i'll post this finally here.

I contacted a BIWF official about their stance on race and i can confirm (as i said) British Israelites are against intermarriage.

theWaris1 is a troll/poser who is toying around with something he doesn't have a clue about.

You can't be married to a non-white (like theWaris1 is) and be BI.

British Israelites are against intermarriage. Please go to EnsignMessage.com or the British Israelite World-Federation and read their articles on race there. British Israelites are against multiracialism/multiculturalism. theWaris1 is a poser who is wrecking our movement by claiming BI is open to anyone and his wife is not white but Amerindian.

Feel free to continue this thread and debate theWaris1. Please though don't consider him BI. He does not represent the BI movement. He is a poser. I've been a British Israelite since i was 16, no BI member i have ever known promotes race mixing or intermarriage like thewaris1, we firmly stand against it - a core tenet of BI is geneaological purity. His account is clearly a fake or as i said he's a poser/confused.

The reason i post this - is because theWaris1 is no authority on BI. He knows nothing about it and is discrediting our movement. So if you further want to debate him - that's great. Just don't consider him BI. He's not.

I really glad you quit the forum. Come back if and when you mature. you should stay away from those posers who pretend to be Christians of some identity or another.

May you learn to read and interpret scripture for yourself.

 

[theFijian]

I've been a British Israelite since i was 16, no BI member i have ever known promotes race mixing or intermarriage like thewaris1, we firmly stand against it - a core tenet of BI is geneaological purity.

This may surprise you Researcher4 (if that is your real name) but I don't actually hate you, I feel great pity for you. You are clearly someone who loves to learn but it appears that from a young age you have been brainwashed, either by others or by your own poor choice of reading literature, into believing a pagan shadow of Biblical Christianity which is at odds with Christ and his Gospel of Grace. If I have been brusque with my words it is because I cannot and will not stand by when the Christian Gospel is slandered in the way which your beliefs do. My hope and prayer for you is that you are lead into a contact with Christians faithful to Christ and his Gospel who may show you how your current beliefs are unsound, unbiblical and unchristian.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

I quit the forum. However to clarify about BI i'll post this finally here.

Go away already.

---------------------

the word Jew is confused today.
Being circumcised was of the religion of Abraham,Moses and the Hebrews and not necessarily of Jews who were not Hebrews. Confused and tricked. I grew up on the same false teachings.

Your argument reminds me of a few other strange claims I've heard lately:

-Earlier in this thread another user who questioned whether prehistoric and ancient Africans were black.
- A joke thread down in the 'Society' section, claiming science has never found a link between homo sapiens and humans.
- On the day of the Royal Wedding I waved a British flag. I heard a passerby say "What's the matter with her? We're English not British."

It's questions like these which have destroyed my ability to detect sarcasm. So enlighten me, if the Jews aren't Hebrews then what are they?

 

[theWaris1]

Go away already.

---------------------



Your argument reminds me of a few other strange claims I've heard lately:

-Earlier in this thread another user who questioned whether prehistoric and ancient Africans were black.
- A joke thread down in the 'Society' section, claiming science has never found a link between homo sapiens and humans.
- On the day of the Royal Wedding I waved a British flag. I heard a passerby say "What's the matter with her? We're English not British."

It's questions like these which have destroyed my ability to detect sarcasm. So enlighten me, if the Jews aren't Hebrews then what are they?

I gave you scriptures and links. You're not reading what I write which is only wasting our time.

Shlama

 

[mindlight]

Having written my final post in my debate with Papias I was browsing the forum and found the Serpent's Seed thread. This strange doctrine is based on the idea that Cain was not a son of Adam but rather the 'seed' of the Serpent (aka Satan). I was surprised to learn that this heretical doctrine had a pretty long history.

One of the issues with Papias was polygenism, something I accused him of early and often. The primary issue here is whether or not Adam had contemporaries (human or hominid) and most importantly, whether or not Adam and Eve are the first parents of us all as the Scriptures teach. Papias denied that he taught or believed in polygenism, there is one among teaches something very similar, something called Preadamism, a belief that humans existed before Adam.

I have no idea where this thread is going but Adam of the Genesis account in Genesis 2 is clearly the first parent of humanity, father of us all.

Man 'Adam' - H120 אדם 'âdâm aw-dawm' From H119; ruddy, Strong's Dictionary)

A. Nouns.
'adam (H120), "man; mankind; people; someone (indefinite); Adam (the first man)."...This noun is related to the verb 'adom, "to be red," and therefore probably relates to the original ruddiness of human skin. The noun connotes "man" as the creature created in God's image, the crown of all creation. In its first appearance 'adam is used for mankind, or generic man: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..." (Gen.1:26). In Gen.2:7 the word refers to the first "man," Adam: "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." (Vines Dictionary)
​

I have done a little reading on the subject and even the Scofield Study Bible has a reference to a preadamite race, it would seem to be connected to the Gap Theory.

The view that there were pre-adamites has historically been linked to racism. Many contemporary proponents of this view are non-racist like Hugh Ross, an Old Earth Creationist and evolutionist. I'm going to add a few links for future reference:


Serpent's Seed by Wikipedia
Pre-Adamite by Wikipedia
Hugh Ross, CMI article by Dr Jonathan Sarfati

My position is simply this, Adam was created from the dust of the earth and Eve from Adam's rib. All humans are descendants from these two and the link in the genealogy of Luke and discussion of the Pauline discussion of original sin (Romans 5:12; 8:20-22; 1 Corinthians 15:21) makes a pre-adamite race untenable for me as an evangelical.

With that I will post this brief summary of the topic and see where it goes.

Grace and peace,
Mark

It's a really interesting question. On a personal note I have always wondered who Adams children married. If they married their sisters isn't that incest for example. Polygenism is one way to deal with that conundrum by suggesting that while Adam and Eve were special they were not alone in the world they entered outside of Eden and of Gods face to face presence.

But the Bible only offers two other sources for the genes of human beings.

1) The angels who slept with women who then conceived giants and heroes. (Nephilim). The Bible suggests these people were wiped out by the flood. I do not know if one the wives of Noahs sons had genetic links to these or not but would doubt it. So its possible this is now wiped out also. We do not know if angels have since sinned in this way as there is no Bible record of it.

2) The incarnation of Jesus meant that half of Jesus genes came directly from God albeit in accordance with his design for humanity. Since Jesus did not breed with anyone this is a mute point however.

There is no evidence biblically or scientifically that humans have bred successfully with animals or subhumanoid species of any sort so I'd be inclined to reject that view.

Since Adam is taken as the representative first man, the biblical genealogies all begin with him I would inclined to accept the view he is the ancestor of us all. The choice of obedience made by Christ undoes the sin of Adams unfaithfulness with potential effect for all mankind. If we had a different ancestor also one would have to question the efficacy of Christs sacrifice for all of us and his status as firstborn from the dead blazing a trail for all of us to be resurrected and saved.