• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Were Adam and Eve the first?

Discussion in 'Creation & Theistic Evolution' started by wisdomseeker, Jun 16, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. depthdeception

    depthdeception Well-Known Member

  2. genez

    genez Contributor Supporter

    United States
    Everyone was waiting for a male son. For it was promised that a son would crush the head of the serpent.

    Genesis 3:15 niv
    "And I will put enmity
    between you and the woman,
    and between your seed and hers;
    he will crush your head,
    and you will strike his heel."

    It appears from what is implied in Eve's words at bit later on, that they were having females only, for some time. These are not mentioned, because all the attention was rivited on the male births, awaiting the savior.

    Genesis 4:1 niv
    "Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man."

    Why did Eve use those words specifically? "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man." Why did she need the help of the Lord for a male child? It was because she prayed to the Lord for a male child. Why? They were only having females for some time now. And, that is where Cain found his wife from!

    Grace and peace, GeneZ
  3. Silvertusk

    Silvertusk New Member

    I am not surprised you are confused. Genesis is very confusing indeed. And it is a book that a lot of non-christians have a problem with. It all depends on the interpretation of course. Is it meant to be taken literatly? I doubt it very much considering the scale of the evidence against it. If the Bible is meant to be the word or God and God is infalliable and Science tells us that the earth is about 4 billion years old and the Universe is about 14-15 billion years - then to maintain its infalliability a literal interpretation is incorrect. (IMHO).

    A very good interpretation of it can be found at www.godandscience.com which is very close to what the majority of scientists agree with on with the beginning of our planet. Which when you look at it is incredible.

    I think another important point especially about Adam & Eve, is the message behind the story that is a basis for all our faiths and our reconciliation with God through Jesus Christ. That is the important point.

    Also don't forget that the language was written in a way that people at the time could relate to. I doubt that there was very little point in teaching them the true physics and biological aspects of the creation and the birth of mankind because the people reading it wouldn't have a clue what the author was on about.
  4. Sinai

    Sinai Well-Known Member

    The original Hebrew text and passages from the Talmud (the collection of writings constituting the Jewish civil and religious law) and from ancient Jewish commentators indicate that the Bible does not close the door on the possibility that there were other people—including men before Adam—but that Adam was the first human being to be created with an eternal soul.

    Hebrew has two words for soul, nefesh and neshama, and both come into play in the first two chapters of Genesis. When Genesis 1:21 tells us that “God created…every animal,” it signifies that all animals (humans included) are infused with the nefesh or soul of animal life. When humans are mentioned a few verses later (Genesis 1:27 and 2:7), the text tells of a further creation, which distinguishes humans from lower animals: The third “creation” mentioned in the first chapter of Genesis is of our eternal and immortal soul, our neshama (the first two “creations” were of the universe and of life).

    The closing of Genesis 2:7 has a subtlety lost in the English. It is usually translated as: “…and [God] breathed into his nostrils the neshama of life and the adam became a living soul” (Gen. 2:7). The Hebrew text actually states: “…and the adam became to a living soul.”

    Rabbi Moses ben Nahman (generally referred to as Nahmanides) lived from 1194 to 1270 A.D. or C.E.—well before modern scientific discoveries that indicate that man may have been on our planet substantially longer than just a few thousand years. Nahmanides wrote that the “to” (the Hebrew letter lamed prefixed to the word “soul” in the verse) is superfluous from a grammatical stance and so must be there to teach something. Lamed, he noted, indicates a change in form and may have been placed there to describe mankind as progressing through stages of mineral, plant, fish, and animal. Finally, upon receiving the neshama, that creature which had already been formed became a complete human. He concludes his extensive commentary on the implications of this lamed by noting that “it may be that the verse is stating that [prior to receiving the neshama] it was a completely living being and [by the neshama] it was transformed into another man.”

    In other words, prior to God’s creation of the neshama for man, there may have been something like a man that was not quite a human in that it lacked the neshama or eternal soul.

    Note that Nahmanides’ writings preceded discoveries of modern paleontology by hundreds of years---and the Bible said it three thousand years before discoveries of modern science.

  5. depthdeception

    depthdeception Well-Known Member

    Interesting post. If nothing else, I appreciate the unique perspective! Thanks for the contribution.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.