Christian Readers discussion
Was Adam really the first man created on Earth?
date
newest »
newest »
I don't think Adam was the first man either. Wow, you have alot of figures worked out. Amazing. Have you ever wondered if maybe Adam and Eve are symbols, archetypes if you will, for what happened to many of the students in Eden. Why there was a forbidden fruit in the Garden, seems to be the fact that the student could choose, using one of the Universal Laws, Free Will. The temptation to deliberately go against God's laws is a companion of Free Will. The "fruit of the knowledge of good and evil" might be a symbol for a state of consciousness, namely the frame of mind that makes it possible for a student to go against the laws of God out of willful ignorance.
Morning wrote: "I don't think Adam was the first man either. Wow, you have alot of figures worked out. Amazing. Have you ever wondered if maybe Adam and Eve are symbols, archetypes if you will, for what happened t..."Morning: Thanks for your reply-Just wait until I post a lot more questions. Take Care and God Bless
Scientists change their dates and information every time they get new and better information to help them be more accurate. Science really is only about what they can observe and therefore prove. Anything else is just a theory. They were not around to observe Adam and Eve being created. You have to either believe what the Bible says or not. That's between you and God. There are also plenty of scientists who would tell you that the carbon dating method is seriously flawed. Check out this link for just one article:
my link text
I'm no scientist, but basically they are assuming that the rates and information today is the same for when the Earth was created. That's an assumption that nobody can prove - because nobody was there. There is even evidence that points to the contrary. The article explains much better than I can.
Their millions of years are based mostly on their presupposition that it would take that long for life to evolve from sludge to us (including the ape in between). They are colored by what they expect to find - what they want to believe. Everyone looks at evidence from their point of view. That's why eyewitness testimony from an accident isn't all the same - they see it all from their perspective.
What I know for sure is that it's dangerous to try and say you're going to use the "science" of man to prove or disprove parts of the Bible. Also, if you decide that you don't believe that that part of the Bible is truth and needs to be accepted as it is written then you open the door to saying that you don't want to accept other parts either. Which parts do you accept? Which parts are just symbol? Which parts do you throw out altogether?
In this world of shifting ideas of right and wrong - trends of morality and political correctness... Either we have a Bible which tells us the truth about God and is His Word - and we trust it for learning about who He is and what He wants - or not. Then it's just like it says in the last verse of Judges - where everyone was doing what was right in their own eyes. God doesn't like that. In Proverbs it says that every man thinks his way is right but the Lord weighs his heart.
Everyone has to work out their own ideas about their faith and salvation - but I think the easiest way for our enemy to weaken our faith is to attack our trust and reliance upon the Word of God as a standard for our lives.
Thanks for your comments-Have you ever read the book of Enoch? I believe with my whole heart in God and Jesus Christ. I just wanted or want to know more about my God and my Savior. A lot of imagination was used when the scriptures were written. To me, the Bible is mere cliff notes of a much larger story. I believe in God and have little faith in mankind. Thanks Once again. May the love of God and the peace of Christ be with you.
It's a good question Tommy but most theologians place the formation of Adam at about 4004b.c. Being formed on the sixth day doesn't tell you when he was formed other than on the sixth day. Counting the years and descendants of Adam until the birth of Jesus, a year we can more accurately estimate, or the other way around as they are both given in the Gospels, will give you a more accurate time line. I wrote an article on the subject of Adam not being the first man which may be of some help.To those of you who have read my previous articles, you know that I've written a book that attempts to bridge the gap between what the Bible narrative is and what science and archeology tells us to be the facts. My contention is that they should not contradict each other but in fact must agree with each other. The apparent discrepancies I feel come from a misinterpretation of the scriptures.
In this article, we will Here's a look at what the traditional Christian narrative is concerning the origin of mankind compared to the story of Adam which is where many think the narrative gets off track with science.
Science tells us that modern man is anywhere from 14,000 to 200,000 years old. The city of Jericho is said to be the oldest continually-inhabited city in the world at almost 11,000 years old. We have evidence of Neolithic villages in China at about 4500B.C. in the Yellow River valley. Just the sheer number of people in both China and India indicate very old civilizations. The evidence is, man has been around for a while.
Most Christians believe that all the people of the world come from Adam and Eve. The Bible places the formation of Adam at 4004 B.C. The idea that two people in Mesopotamia gave birth to all the various races of the world and to the approximate 12 billion people who have been born since that time, a mere 6,000 years ago, is already hard to believe. Add to that the account of a worldwide flood that leaves only eight people, Noah and his family, to repeat this incredible process starting in 2349 B.C., and it makes for a pretty hard story to swallow. Do we really believe that Adam and Noah had Chinese, Indian, or African children?
Let's take a look at the Christian narrative and the facts given us in chapter one of Genesis. We are told in verse 11, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to it's kind".These are plants of the Earth that need no man to cultivate because they reproduce on their own with their own seed.
After creating the animal kingdom, including "beasts of the earth" in verse 24, God then creates mankind. In verse 27 it states, "male and female He created them".Both male and female at the same time. Note also the word "created" which we'll come back to in a moment.
In verse 28 we read that God says to mankind, "Be fruitful and multiply; replenish the earth and subdue it" and to have dominion over the plants and animals. Basically, to spread out over the Earth and to be hunter gatherers.
In chapter 2, God rests on the seventh day. There is no time frame given of when this work was done and how long God rested before His next move. It could have been a week, a year, 14,000 years ago or even 200,000 years ago. It just doesn't say and therefore does not contradict science yet.
It's here, with the story of Adam, where many people believe the Christian story gets off track. Traditional thought is that the story of Adam is a recap of chapter 1 but we'll see that every element of the two stories are completely opposite of each other and therefore a completely different story, not a recap.
We pick up the story of Adam in verse 5 where God states that "there was no man to till the ground." If Adam had not been created yet, why would God say there was no man to till the ground? That would be a given. It also states that there were no plants of the "field". Plants of the field as in crops versus plants of the Earth in chapter one. Again, opposites.
In verse 7 Adam is formed, not created. It is a completely different word from created and the etymology of the word comes from a potter forming or molding clay on a potters wheel. He is also formed alone, not male and female as in chapter one. Eve isn't made until after God sees Adam needs help at which point she is taken from Adam as opposed to being created separately male and female. Opposite again from chapter one.
As opposed to spreading out over the Earth as hunter gatherers, Adam is placed in a garden in verses 8 and 15 to tend to the garden. No roaming around for Adam!
In verse 19 God forms every "beast of the field" and brings them to Adam. Not beasts of the Earth as in chapter one but of the field. Adam is being taught farming and agricultural techniques, not hunting and gathering skills.
You can see that these two stories are complete opposites of each other and in no way can the story of Adam be construed as a recap. By making chapter 2 a recap of chapter 1, you're forcing all the information in chapter 1 into a window that starts at 4004 B.C. It doesn't hold water. Adam is the beginning of a whole new branch of the human family for the specific purpose of being the pure blood line that Jesus would be born from.
This would explain not only the discrepancy of the human time line between the Bible and science, but it also helps answer questions like where Cain got his wife from. We are told that after Cain leaves the presence of Adam and Eve that he goes to the land of Nod and takes a wife. How could there be a land of anything if there was no one else on Earth? How could he take a wife when after leaving his parents the next child they have is another boy, Seth? After having a son, Cain builds a city and names it after his son. A city for just three people?
This also explains how Noah steps off the ark and there are "isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations" as it states in Genesis 10:5. Noah, nor anyone from the Adamic blood line, can be a Gentile. Yet there are so many of them after the flood that they have their own languages, lands, and nations. In the New Testament, the word nation is the Greek word ethnos, where we get the word ethnic. The Adamic line can neither be Gentile nor ethnic by definition.
All people do not come from Adam and Eve but are much older and were created on the sixth day where God blessed them and found them all to be "very good" as it states in Genesis 1:31. And so it is.
Hi everyone,I thought it would be alright to remind us all of 1 Corinthians 15.45:
"45So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit."
This truth is confirmed by both the Old and the New Testaments. Many fact in the Bible are straightforward and do not need explanation. I believe there's a connection between science and the Word of God. But science (or any human knowledge or expertise) should not, in fact cannot, correct God's Word. It is the other way around. After all, the Bible also says, let God be true and every man a liar.
Thanks and God bless everyone.
Jonathan wrote: "Hi everyone,I thought it would be alright to remind us all of 1 Corinthians 15.45:
"45So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit."
..."TRUTH = Let... God be True + Every man a liar
Did I hit the right note for an equation? Or there's a far more bigger equation than earlier.
Anyway, you're right...
Thanks and God bless also
Jonathan wrote: "Hi everyone,I thought it would be alright to remind us all of 1 Corinthians 15.45:
"45So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit."
..."
Amen!
I'd like to expound on what was pointed out in 1 Corintians 15:45, "The first man Adam became a living being" the last Adam, a life-giving spirit."Well, as we all know the last Adam refers to Jesus. But let me ask you, what is this "life"? This "Life" has been given to Adam, and this "Life" is what the Christ came here to give us. To be clear, This "life" must be different from the word life that we commonly use, as it refers to the state of living. Well, animals are in the state of living yet no where in the bible does it say that this "life" was given to them. So if this "Life" doesn't mean the "state of living", then what does it refer to? The first being mentioned in the Bible to have this "Life" was Adam. And the giver of this "Life" as God, and later Christ. Let's take a look at what Christ did here on Earth. Christ came to this world to give life. Well, he gave "the state of living" again to Lazarus, but did he come to us just to save one man from death? Well, no. But he came to give life. So this life might refer to something other than "the state of living". Then what is this "life"? Let's continue looking further into what Christ gave to us. It is clear that all of his actions and the reactions by the Pharisees were because of the truth he gave to the people. All he did was to give the truth. The truth about the heavens, the truth about God, the truth about our actions. Giving the truth is what he did on this world before he was crucified. Did he give life? He gave life once. But he gave the truth every chance he got. So can this "Life" refer to the truth that Jesus spoke? But what is this "truth". It is mentioned all throughout the Bible that this "truth" is the word of God. So Jesus came to us to give the word of God. Then, let's go back to Adam. Was this "Life" that God "breathed" into Adam, not "the state of living" but rather the truth? the word of God? As Adam was the first to receive this "Life", the truth, the word of God. Would he be the first man to know the truth? The first man to know the word of God?
If so, when the bible refers to Adam as the first man, would it mean that “man” is a person that knows the word of god? Well, there were other beings mentioned in the bible like the beings God would punish if they killed Cain. Why were they not mentioned as “man”? Was it because they did not have the word of God? Then does that mean, that Adam, literally speaking, wasn’t mentioned in the Bible as the first living human but rather the first to know the truth, the word of God?
So what does this all mean? Well, this was only one of many ways to approach that Adam was not the first homo-sapien.
Whether science today is imperfect in acquiring correct dates and accurate carbon dating, it is factual to a very credible degree that homo-sapiens were roaming the Earth before the time of Adam. And that the Bible isn’t referring to Adam as the first homo-sapien but rather the first man in God’s eyes. The first to hear the word of God, which is the “life” that came out of God’s mouth as “breath”. This is my point. It is something to think about. For many years, this simple logic was mislead and distorted because of the unknown. But as science slowly proves facts, we need to look at the bible again and see what we might have misunderstood. We need to acknowledge our mistakes and see that there was more to it that what we learn in Sunday school. We need to find the truth again, that has been lost after the death of Christ. It is stated in Revelations that the secrets from the beginning will be revealed when the right time comes. How will it be revealed when no one is looking for it? We must study the word of God continuously.
As you may have noticed, I never used any facts outside the bible. I only applied current logic I have attained to the scriptures. The scriptures are incredibly factual and is never flawed, as I have noticed in my years of study (the contradictions that many point out are not contradictions at all). As I have applied my current logic in my judgement, I took this the part of the bible, saying to myself, “Adam cannot be the first homo-sapien”. By doing so, I realized new things from the bible. Which, now, all of you agree with. So, let’s continue studying the bible. I have done this for many years, and I can say that God is truly amazing in his works. That the bible does not need to extend to the universe that we are slowly knowing, but only to eternal life. Where attaining it is the end, and it is what God has wanted since the beginning.
To further poke your curiosity, knowing that Jesus Christ is the one and only savior will not grant you access to the kingdom of heaven. As Jesus clearly pointed out, calling “Lord, Lord” will not give you the kingdom of heaven. Yet so many Christians flaunt their life on earthly things while believing that they are saved by “believing in Jesus Christ”. Christ says that you must work for it and be prepared. Through all of this parables, he mentions two common things, “knowing” and “preparing”. The gift of heaven will only given to those who know and is prepared. But “know” what exactly? Jesus states in every, and I mean every, gospel of his disciples that one must know the word of God. Do you truly know the word of God? When logic, modern knowledge, and our current understanding of the scriptures collide, can we truly say that we know the word of God? Jesus says that he will come like a thief, without anyone knowing. And when the right time comes, that those who are prepared will enter the kingdom of heaven. He says that it will be realized as the seals will be broken. Those who truly now the word of God will understand the events of the revelation. Just as the parables of the maidens and the oil lamp, those who are prepared with the oil, with the word of God, will enter the kingdom of heaven. So what should I do? what should you do? what should we all do to be granted the gift of heaven? we must know, study, the word of God. And when the right time comes we will know what the gift of heaven is. Those who are not prepared will not understand what the kingdom of heaven is. I do not know if I am ready, how do I know? because after all the years I’ve spent studying the bible and realizing the truth, I still realized more truth to the scriptures as I study it more. There seems to be so much more to learn about the truth. So help me, by giving your input, and I will too with you. If there is anything that you would like to share or to inquire, email me at [email protected]. I’d be happy to discuss my findings of the truth with you. I want access to the kingdom of heaven, let us all prepare for it.
Jerry wrote: "It's a good question Tommy but most theologians place the formation of Adam at about 4004b.c. Being formed on the sixth day doesn't tell you when he was formed other than on the sixth day. Counting..."No man to till the land. What does this mean? If there were men, would they not be able to till the land and farm?...would "tilling the land" mean something other than preparing the land to grow crops?
Growing crops, reaping and sowing in the parables of Jesus Christ. Does Christ's parables about harvest have a connection to what was mentioned in Genesis that there is "no man to till the land"? Something to think about i guess.
Yes it is something to think about!!
Mod
If you believe anyone or anything else... you can believe whatever you want...
Easy as that!
I saw Dr. Ben Carson on the O'Reilly Factor tonight and when asked if he (Ben) believed that Adam and Eve were real people, Dr. Carson did not answer "Yes" or "No". I like Dr. Carson, but it must be difficult to try to get elected within such a secular culture.
Answers wrote: "I'd like to expound on what was pointed out in 1 Corintians 15:45, "The first man Adam became a living being" the last Adam, a life-giving spirit."Well, as we all know the last Adam refers to Jes..."
Interesting thoughts on this subject I have mulled over in my mind while waiting for insight from the Holy Spirit. Can't say yet I agree yet, but this theory definitely piques my interest because it is very clear from the Book of Genesis that the earth had been in existence - was already formed - before God began His work of creation in so far as it relates to Adam and Eve. Thank you for taking the time to post these thoughts.
Truths that Create or Enhance Loving Relationships: The Christian Perspective
Oghenovo Obrimah
Mod
________________________
Romans 5:12-14
12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
________________________
God said it... that settles it...
...all other discussion is amongst mere men who hold their own opinions as superior to God's stated facts!
Jerry:I must take issue with you that most theologians believe Adam was formed about 4004 BCE. Literalists all believe that, but most credible theologians do not. I am also aware there are many on this string who believe if you aren't a literalists you can't be a theologian. This chronology of creation was given by Bishop James Ussher (1581-1656). He was an Irish theologian and scholar and seen in his day as a defender of learning. He arrived at his chronology by taking the book of Genesis and adding up all the "begats." That led to his conviction that the universe was created in the year 4004 BCE, on October 23. Others, not to be outdone, pinpointed the time as exactly 9 a.m., London time. This was also considered to have been midnight in the Garden of Eden. This chronology appeared in the margins of many editions of the Authorized Version of the Bible, otherwise known as the King James Version. Generations have used this as "proof" of when creation happened. To give credibility to your statement, give me 5 names of theologians who believe what you have said. Also include the credentials of the theologians you name.
Answers wrote: "I'd like to expound on what was pointed out in 1 Corintians 15:45, "The first man Adam became a living being" the last Adam, a life-giving spirit."Well, as we all know the last Adam refers to Jes..."
"The scriptures are incredibly factual and is never flawed, as I have noticed in my years of study (the contradictions that many point out are not contradictions at all)."
I don't know who made the above statement, but there are many contradictions in the Bible without even looking too far. I will give a simple one. In Mark we read that the women at the tomb told no one because they were afraid. Matthew and Luke both basically say they went and spread the good news. Now I ask, how can it be both ways? And if it can't be both ways, it appears to me like a contradiction.
Mod
...most are bad ones.
_______________________
Anyone attacking the integrity of the Bible (which God promised to protect) is a "very bad theologian".
Psalm 12:6-7
6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
Robert wrote: "Everyone is a theologian......most are bad ones.
_______________________
Anyone attacking the integrity of the Bible (which God promised to protect) is a "very bad theologian".
Psalm 12:6-7
6 T..."
For those of you who are not aware of it, Robert is unable to say he attends church. What credibility can anything he says have?
Mod
My response: For those who are not aware of it, Marion is more concerned about DESTROYING the credibility of the Bible... even though God PROMISED to protect His Word!
Anyone attacking the integrity of the Bible (which God promised to protect) is a "very bad theologian".
Psalm 12:6-7
6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
According to Enoch, one of God’s days is equal to 1,000 years. Adam was created on the 6th day; so that means Adam was created sometime in the year of 6,000 BC. Adam died at the age of 934 which added to 6,000 is equal to 6,934. Now add the 5,500 years to 6,934 which equal 12,434 years-which is the estimated time of Christ’s death, resurrection, and descenion into Hell to free Adam. Now, add our present day of 2010 and your total is 14,444-give or take a few years.
This number, 14,444, I estimate to be the total age of civilized mankind.
Scientists have determined that the Neanderthal caveman inhabited the earth millions of years ago. Now, that is a big difference from the time Enoch and the Book of Genesis claim as the dates of the creation of the world and Adam.
Another difference between Adam and the Neanderthal caveman was that Adam was educated and could talk. According to the Book of Genesis, Adam named the animals and named God.
Also, there are some of those out there who think that man evolved from an ape which I highly disagree. I firmly believe that man was created in God’s image and God is not an ape which is further evidenced by the fact that angels of heaven gazed down upon the beauty of the earthly maidens. They descended to earth and took these maidens as their wives which angered God.
I do not think that the angels would have been attracted to a gorilla.