Adam and Eve

[JJsaint]

I did read your post. I then quoted the post quite dove wrote. Did you read her post? Here it is again:

Originally Posted by quiet dove
But if God created other men and women besides Adam, they would have then been created like Adam with out sin, and there is your conflict. What happen to those people, did they all disobey God then because Adams sin would not have effected the others that you believe God created. Or were these who had not sinned just mixed in with the fallen then-which would not work either.

Adam had to reproduce after himself, like kind, thus fallen mankind. Adam's fallen mankind son could not have found an un-fallen mankind women and it been ok to marry and reproduce children, nor would an un-fallen one have even considered such. That would be a major unequally yoked situation.

If you are going to make Adam and Eve a parable, is then the tree of knowledge also a parable? Is the creation of the animals, is the promise regarding the woman's seed? Where do you stop and how do you decide. I mean, Noah and the flood, the tower of Babel. When does it stop and where is the dividing line?

Regardless of genetics, or any of that, it will not work if God created more than just Adam and Eve because we know that all man kind are in a fallen state, reproduced in like kind from Adam and Eve. If others were created they would have been unaffected by Adams fall and thus a mixture of sinful and sinless.

Adam was the formation,the Bible is the book of Adam

Genesis 5:1:This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

Other races are not of Adam.
Ezekiel 31 is symbolic of that,families and nations in the garden of Eden who admired the early Assyrian empire.
These were people who were not of Adam... ''so that all the trees of Eden, that were in the garden of God, envied him.''

The other races were already here.
Where do you think Cain found his wife?(Genesis 4:17)





You also have this problem...

Genesis 1:26-27:²⁶And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. ²⁷So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Man in that verse in the Hebrew is translated...

119 'adam aw-dam' to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy:--be (dyed, made) red (ruddy).

Genesis 5:3:And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:

Seth was in the likeness of Adam and Adam in the Hebrew means...

119 'adam aw-dam' to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy:--be (dyed, made) red (ruddy).

Are we to say other races were not in the likeness and image of Adam?

''to show blood'' or ''turn rosy''

They are only characteristics of someone who is white as only a white man can show blood in the face or turn rosy.

Adam was given a law,Just one.

Genesis 2:16-17:¹⁶And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

¹⁷But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

As for the people who were already here...

Romans 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

[BrianW]

So then you are saying that only the decedents of Adam can saved? That only one certain race can be Christians?

[JJsaint]

So then you are saying that only the decedents of Adam can saved? That only one certain race can be Christians?

Other races were already here on the earth.
God deals with Adam's descendents throughout the Bible and if not everyone is from Adam...

Amos 3:2:You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.

God deals with Israel who is from Adam.
The other races are NOT Israel,Israel was chosen above all people(Deuteronomy 7:6)
Jesus came for Israel(Matthew 15:24)
The Apostles were to go to Israel(Matthew 10:6)

Everyone can be Christians,but only one people is Israel.

[markedward]

But if God created other men and women besides Adam, they would have then been created like Adam with out sin, and there is your conflict. What happen to those people, did they all disobey God then because Adams sin would not have effected the others that you believe God created. Or were these who had not sinned just mixed in with the fallen then-which would not work either.

This is a lot of unnecessary, speculative dichotomizing.

Paul says that when Adam disobeyed God, sin came into the world, so that the very world itself was 'groaning' from the effects of sin, waiting to be redeemed. All men being sinful has nothing to do with all men being descended from Adam... otherwise the people who claim that sin is a blood-born disease, passed on from one generation to the next, are entirely justified in the nonsensical logic they're using.

Sin is a spiritual condition that humanity came into bondage, through the disobedience of Adam. Whether Adam was the father of all humans, or the federal head of many contemporaneous humans, or a metaphoric representation of 'humanity' as a whole, it was his disobedience that causes sin to come upon all of humanity... not that he disobeyed, contracted a 'sin' disease, and then passed it on through begetting children.

If you are going to make Adam and Eve a parable, is then the tree of knowledge also a parable? Is the creation of the animals, is the promise regarding the woman's seed? Where do you stop and how do you decide. I mean, Noah and the flood, the tower of Babel. When does it stop and where is the dividing line?

The dividing line is 'genre'.

When we read something like Psalm 18, it very clearly is a different genre from, say, 2 Kings 14 or Matthew 5. We do not interpret Psalm 18 the same way we interpret Matthew 5, because the very text itself - the style, the mannerisms, the figures of speech - indicates to us what genre of literature it falls under. Psalm 18 is highly poetic, hyperbolic, metaphoric: it is a song of praise that uses an extensive figure of speech (God riding on clouds, shooting lightning, breathing fire and smoke) to describe the historical events it corresponds to (the defeat of David's enemies, including Saul's self-impalement on his sword). When we turn to Matthew 5, it would be foolish to interpret it in the same way as Psalm 18. It simply is not the same genre.

Genesis 1-11 are very different in style, mannerisms, and figures of speech in comparison to Genesis 12-50. There is, in one way or another, a marked difference of genre between those two sections of Genesis.

Most Christians refuse to accept it, but the Bible is not a science book. It is a theological book that tells a story: the story of Israel and its God. The story, as God inspired men to write it, did not set out to correct the mistaken perceptions of the world. Joshua thought the sun passed over the earth and could be held still, but the reality is that the sun is stationary while it is the spherical earth that orbits the sun. Christians refused to accept that fact until it was painfully undeniable. (And even now there are a remote few who still deny it.)

God is a wonderful God who condescends to speak to his people on their own level. The Psalms were not dictated by God, as if he was so selfish that he commanded various men 'Write praises for me!' Rather, those men were so inspired by God and his spirit that they wrote those praises of their own will, in their own language, with the style and mannerisms and figures of speech that were common to their time and culture.

Same thing goes for something like the gospel of Luke. The author (Luke, or whoever) was so touched and moved by the life and teachings and sacrifice of Jesus, he was so inspired by God, that he set out to write a testimony about Jesus' life and teachings and sacrifice, and what God did through Jesus and through Jesus' followers. But this did not consist of God dictating to Luke what to write. He allowed Luke to write it in his own style and mannerisms and figures of speech, as were common to Luke's time and culture: Luke's gospel follows the genre of a 1st-century Greek biography (vastly different from the genre of a 21st-century American biography).

In the same way...

Genesis 1-11 fall under an ancient genre we call 'creation myth'. Christians get tripped up over the word 'myth', and assume it means 'lie' or 'fake'. That's not what it means (let alone in the context of genre). In the context of genre, 'myth' simply describes the style, mannerisms, and figures of speech found in the text: highly fantastical, highly theological, and in some cases, highly compressed. We have found dozens of 'myths' from the ancient world, and some of them are 'creation myths' (i.e. 'myths' that focus on the creation of the world and its earliest histories).

By 'fantastical' I'm referring to the type of language and imagery. By 'theological' I'm referring to the purpose and direction. By 'compressed' I'm referring to the brevity of the stories.

This genre can (and does) contain 'history', but conveying literal, absolute 'history' is not its focus or goal, and the extent of 'history' that is depicted through other methods (such as metaphor, poetry, or symbolism) varies from story to story. And, in something that I find completely ludicrous, most Christians refuse to accept that ancient Israelites would have accepted this genre as a legitimate genre for God to communicate through.

God is a wonderful God who condescends to speak to his people on their own level. Genesis 1-11 were not dictated by God, as if he was so concerned with giving a history lesson to the Israelites as they left Egypt. 'Memorize this history!' Rather, the author (Moses, or whoever) was so inspired by God and his spirit that he wrote Israel's origins, in his own language, with the style and mannerisms and figures of speech that were common to his time and culture.

A powerful story in which the one true God, Yahweh, created the world with order and purpose (set in a repetitive prose, framed through the days of the week, making it easy to remember). How Yahweh stooped down to create humanity with love and care. How Yahweh determined that humanity was to serve as his kingdom of priests on the earth, to serve God and each other. How humanity disobeyed Yahweh because of selfishness and deception. How sin brings death to humanity. And how Yahweh promised to conquer sin for humanity to live.

[Lone Arranger]

edited by admin

[markedward]

As far as brothers and sisters reproducing, the prohibition against incest did not come until much later.

Let's say, after having Cain and Abel, that Adam died before he could have any daughters. In this hypothetical situation... would it have been entirely okay for Cain to marry his mother, Eve, and have children with her? Incest wasn't forbidden, after all. In fact, polygamy wasn't forbidden either. So if Adam had died, Eve could have married both Cain and Abel and had children with each of them. Heck, Cain and Abel could have married each other, since homosexuality was not yet forbidden.

Either incest, polygamy and homosexuality were sinful from the very beginning (and hence, either Cain married his sister and sinned, or Cain didn't marry his sister), or else what is 'sinful' is contingent upon what God happens to decree at a certain time (and hence, God could reverse his prohibition on incest, polygamy and homosexuality).

[JJsaint]

I'm endlessly surprised at the sort of nonsense that goes through some of these posts. Do you who post here believe the Bible is the word of God or not? Clearly, based on what is posted, many of you don't, or think whatever you might cook up in your daydreams is more accurate than God's word.

The bible teaches everyone in the world descended from two people, Adam and Eve. End of story. Someone said something about race. All the races we have now descended from them. End of story.

As far as brothers and sisters reproducing, the prohibition against incest did not come until much later. The one that tried to say otherwise by saying God doesn't change, might consider that man was created and ran around naked until after the fall. Clearly this was okay with God until sin entered the picture. God doesn't change, but it's clear from scripture that some of His dealing with man have changed through the centuries.

Read the Bible. Believe it is the absolute and only revealed truth. All your answers are in it. End of story.

Where did Cain seek out a wife? (Genesis 4:17)
Why did he build a city for 2 people?
Who was Cain afraid was going to slay him? (Genesis 4:14)
Keep in mind,Seth was the next born,as a substitute for Abel(Genesis 4:25)

Do you have answers for these questions without moving the timeline from the children in Adam's later years(Genesis 5:4) to before Seth?

As for ''incest'' why in the world would Cain take a wife from his sister,naturally he would probably be afraid his family would slay him otherwise he would not have stated ''that every one that findeth me shall slay me'' so Cain marrying a sister does not stand up...and for that matter why would he need a mark(protection)?
His family would know him by sight?(Genesis 4:15)

Read Ezekiel 31...you may find more answers there...

...but do not state ''End of story''

[Lone Arranger]

Hypotheticals are not worth considering because they are not what happened. Again, stick with what the Bible says, and only what it says. No where in the Bible does it say anything about any other human beings, and if such were the case it would destroy the integrity of scripture, and completely undermine the plan of salvation in Christ.

Sin, which passed down to all of human kind through Adam, passed to all man. "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned, Romans 5:12" The Bible tells us all men are sinners because Adam was their father. Adam, as you know, was Cain's father. Therefore any child Adam fathered would be at the least a 1/2 sister or close relative. There's no getting around it. What you are suggesting would require a different father than Adam, which clearly wasn't the case. And such a person would never have died since death came through sin and sin through Adam, so we could still discuss this with him today. Obviously untrue.

[markedward]

Hypotheticals are not worth considering because they are not what happened.

Would it have been a sin if Cain had married Eve, or if Eve had married both Cain and Abel, or if Cain had married Abel?

If you are going to claim that incest between brother and sister was not a sin at that time, then you must be prepared to answer whether or not incest between a mother and son was sinful, or whether or not polygamy was sinful, or whether or not homosexuality was sinful.

Did Lamech sin because he was a polygamist?

Did Lot and his daughters sin because they had parent-child incest?

Did the people of Sodom and Gomorrah sin when they committed homosexual acts?

According to what you have said before, since these things were not explicitly prohibited yet, they were not sinful.

and if such were the case it would destroy the integrity of scripture, and completely undermine the plan of salvation in Christ.

Is Psalm 18 the same genre as Matthew 5? Do you interpret Psalm 18 and Matthew 5 the same way?

Sin, which passed down to all of human kind through Adam, passed to all man. "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned, Romans 5:12"

The Bible tells us all men are sinners because Adam was their father.

Speaking of 'stick with what the Bible says'... Scripture does not say that 'all men are sinners because Adam was their father'. What it says is that 'sin entered the world through one man'. Those two sentences are not synonymous.

[JJsaint]

Hypotheticals are not worth considering because they are not what happened. Again, stick with what the Bible says, and only what it says. No where in the Bible does it say anything about any other human beings, and if such were the case it would destroy the integrity of scripture, and completely undermine the plan of salvation in Christ.

Sin, which passed down to all of human kind through Adam, passed to all man. "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned, Romans 5:12" The Bible tells us all men are sinners because Adam was their father. Adam, as you know, was Cain's father. Therefore any child Adam fathered would be at the least a 1/2 sister or close relative. There's no getting around it. What you are suggesting would require a different father than Adam, which clearly wasn't the case. And such a person would never have died since death came through sin and sin through Adam, so we could still discuss this with him today. Obviously untrue.

The Bible does talk about other human beings!

Read Ezekiel 31. - It is symbolic.

Ezekiel 31:3-9:³Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs. ⁴The waters made him great, the deep set him up on high with her rivers running round about his plants, and sent her little rivers unto all the trees of the field.
⁵Therefore his height was exalted above all the trees of the field, and his boughs were multiplied, and his branches became long because of the multitude of waters, when he shot forth.
⁶All the fowls of heaven made their nests in his boughs, and under his branches did all the beasts of the field bring forth their young, and under his shadow dwelt all great nations.
⁷Thus was he fair in his greatness, in the length of his branches: for his root was by great waters.
⁸The cedars in the garden of God could not hide him: the fir trees were not like his boughs, and the chestnut trees were not like his branches; nor any tree in the garden of God was like unto him in his beauty.
⁹I have made him fair by the multitude of his branches: so that all the trees of Eden, that were in the garden of God, envied him.

This speaks about the families and nations in Eden who envied the early Assyrian empire.
Trees is used in the symbolic sense for people,for example...

Mark 8:24:And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking.

Also,answer these questions....

Where did Cain seek out a wife? (Genesis 4:17)
Why did he build a city for 2 people?
Who was Cain afraid was going to slay him? (Genesis 4:14)

[chad]

I don't see Genesis 1:26-28 and Gen 2:7-25 as separate creation accounts. I see Gen 1:26-28 as an overall summary and then Gen 2:7-25 as more detail of the same creation event but with more detail.

[jesse]

I posted on here once that I take a view of creation that God created many people outside of Adam and Eve because of one of their sons leaving to meet his wife and because the Bible never says that God created only Adam and Eve. Another poster mentioned that it was possible for brother and sister to mate, or even parents to offspring, if they had perfect genetics with no abnormalities and that I "didn't understand how it works." I never got back to address the point, so I will now; The reason there would be abnormalities in such matings of humans is because there would be too many base pairs in the genetics sequence that didn't match up with their analogous base pairs. For example you would have too many cases of where cytosine would match up with another cytosine because the mating pair would have too much genetics in common, not because they had abnormalities. Don't get me wrong, I believe in God and Christ etc, but this would not work. Most likely the bible mentions Adam and Eve as either a parable or it leaves out the other people that God created around that time.

This seems like a very strange question to me because (as far as i know) one of the very few things that science and the bible agree upon is that we all share a common ancestor.

[jesse]

Also,answer these questions....

Where did Cain seek out a wife? (Genesis 4:17)
Why did he build a city for 2 people?
Who was Cain afraid was going to slay him? (Genesis 4:14)

I don't think you realize how easy it would be to have HUGE populations within Adam's life time. Genesis chapter 5 states that Adam lived 800 years after Seth was born. He was already 3 kids deep. Even if he only had a child every 20 years until he died (which is a very long time between children) he would have had 40 kids. That is not taking into account menopause in eve. However that is also not taking into account that he could have easily had a child every 2 years for lets say... 200 years which would mean 100 children. And the same thing would be expected with many of his offspring. People lived to be hundreds of years old and their was no birth control. In the Cain's lifetime there could easily have been thousands and thousands of people. Also, consider that merely 126 years after Adam died, Noah was born. Within Noah's lifetime the world was so corrupt that the whole earth is destroyed by a flood. There must have been a lot of people around by the time Adam died.

[divaD]

Why did he build a city for 2 people?

Genesis 4:2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

Which would you conclude? Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground from the moment they were born? Or that there is a gap in time in this verse?

Genesis 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

Let's break this passage apart and see if there are any gaps in time here.

And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch

Isn't it reasonable to conclude that from the time Cain knew his wife, until the time she bare Enoch, that a gap in time has taken place?

and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

If you see my point thusfar, nowhere are we told when he builded this city. One thing we do know, it would be after Enoch was born. That could equate to after Enoch has already started raising a family of his own, etc. And besides, we have to take the following into consideration as well.

Genesis 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

If God had already filled the earth with men and women besides Adam and Eve, why are men being seen multiplying on the earth, and daughters were born unto them, at this point? This passage gives the impression that God started out with a man and a woman, and because of that, man slowly but surely began multiplying in the earth. Why would men need to multiply in the earth if God had previously made millions, perhaps billion of them prior to Adam and Eve? And finally, Genesis 6:1 seems to be centered around the time of Noah. And it was around that time that man was said to have begun multiplying in the earth.

One more thing tho, unless one flat out does not believe the flood account. But after the flood, the entire world as we know it today, only one family was responsible for all the people presently on the earth. Everyone else was wiped out in the flood. My guess would be that the population of the world wouldn't have been nowhere as much as it is today, in the pre-flood era.

[otis lilly]

This seems like a very strange question to me because (as far as i know) one of the very few things that science and the bible agree upon is that we all share a common ancestor.

Though I believe we all came from adam and eve,that is a totaly misleading comment,
though science says all humans came from the same common ancestor, and the bible does too, that ancestor is not thought of to be eve in any science in the world that i know of. if it were true there would be no debate.