Is evolutionary science in conflict with Adam and Eve.

But today, people commonly think that Adam and Eve are incompatible with modern evolutionary science. On the one hand, some reject evolutionary science, while affirming the Genesis account of human origins.

However, this is a false dichotomy. Critically, there is nothing in evolutionary science that conflicts with a historical Adam and Eve who are ancestors of us all.

Some of these possibilities have only recently been realized as viable options. In fact, there are so many ways to understand Adam and Eve that it is difficult to classify all of the different models that have been proposed.

There are a multitude of ways to understand Adam and Eve that are consistent with modern science. Even traditional commitments about Adam and Eve need not be in conflict with evolution.

Other notable figures in this camp include Daniel Harlow (2010), Denis Lamoureux (2009. 2013), Karl Giberson (2008:11-12), Alister McGrath, and J.

Enns (2012:53-55). ↩︎.

1:1-2:3 and 2:4-25, an anthropomorphic picture of God, resemblance of features of the Garden Eden with the desert tabernacle and Jerusalem temple, and the character of the talking snake. ↩︎.

A view like this would readily remove any conflict with science, simply because it no longer views Genesis 2-3 as saying anything about real-world events. Collins (2011, chs.

2013). ↩︎.

Another common objection is that without a historical Adam, Paul’s arguments in Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15 would not make sense (Reeves 2011). ↩︎.

John Collins argues that in light of the overarching narrative of the Old Testament, the Genesis 1-11 narrative must retain a historical core, even if it contains special rhetoric and literary techniques to shape the descriptions of the events.4 In addition, other theological concerns may make a historical Adam and Eve necessary, such as maintaining the uniqueness of human beings as made in the image of God, the unity of all humans, a historical Fall from original sinlessness, and the doctrine of original sin.5.

(2016). ↩︎.

According to evolutionary science, humans share common ancestry with the great apes.6 These and other discoveries have led scientists to conclude that anatomically modern humans emerged several hundred thousand years ago in Africa from an evolutionary process. We use the term de novo to mean that Adam and Eve were created instantly and supernaturally “out of the dust” without biological parents, instead of through purely natural processes.

Sanford and Carter (2018) is an example. ↩︎.

Young earth creationists (YECs) choose to resolve this question by rejecting evolutionary science and common ancestry, understanding Adam and Eve to be the first two biological humans created de novo no more than 6,000-10,000 years ago.7 While some YEC scholars have offered alternative accounts of how such a view could fit with the scientific evidence,8 these models are unconvincing to the vast majority of scientists, including even the vast majority of Christian scientists.9.

The first is in conflict with how most scientists understand the evidence. The second deviates from how most Christians have understood Scripture.

Several models of Adam and Eve were previously thought to conflict with the scientific evidence, but turn out to be entirely consistent with it. The key here is understanding the difference between genetic and genealogical ancestry, making a distinction between “humans according to science” and “humans according to Scripture”, and allowing the possibility that Adam and Eve’s descendants interbred with humans outside the Garden.

See Swamidass (2019, especially chapter 14) or this blog post (Story Three) for a shorter overview. Other scholars who have proposed similar models include Andrew Loke (2016) and Kenneth Kemp (2011).

See Rana and Ross (2015) for a more detailed account of this model. Note that there have been multiple versions of the RTB model to take into account new scientific evidence.

An even more ancient Adam is suggested by philosopher and theologian William Lane Craig, who identifies Adam and Eve as two members of the Homo heidelbergensis, a species which existed starting about 700,000 years ago. As current genetic evidence cannot detect bottlenecks in the human population older than about 500,000 years ago, this model is also consistent with the scientific evidence.

See also the upcoming book by Craig (2021). ↩︎.

Fazale Rana and Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe propose that Adam and Eve were the first Homo sapiens and lived 100,000-200,000 years ago, whose descendants interbred with Neanderthals to account for the observed genetic diversity among today’s humans.11 Finally, philosopher and theologian William Lane Craig favors an even more ancient Adam, identifying Adam and Eve as Adam and Eve as two members of the species Homo heidelbergensis, which existed starting about 700,000 years ago.12.

Collins (2011, sections 3e and 4b). See also Beeke (2015).

An important doctrine in the Christian understanding of humanity is monogenesis, the idea that all humans are descended from a single couple.13 Some scholars have argued that monogenesis serves as the foundation for equality between all nations and races, as well as the universal common experience of being fallen and in need of redemption.14 Monogenesis is one of the commonly cited reasons for retaining a historical Adam and Eve.

In other words, evolution and modern science forces us to choose between either: For example, see McKnight and Venema (2017).

To make matters worse, some argued that even an ancient Adam and Eve could not be ancestors of us all. This also turned out to be false, as current scientific methods cannot detect bottlenecks older than about 500,000 years ago (see note 11).

Some argued that this last option was also in conflict with the evidence.15 In this way, traditional readings of Genesis and traditional doctrine were thought to need revision due to an irresolvable conflict with science.16. See note 10 above regarding the recent Adam and Eve model proposed by Swamidass.

However, it turns out that this is a false dilemma, based on a mistaken understanding of the scientific evidence. As we have mentioned above, even if Adam and Eve were as recent as 6,000 years ago, we all could descend from them.17 So the dilemma between a recent Adam and Eve and monogenesis is resolved.

Paleoanthropologists observe evidence of human-like behavior reaching back to at least the Upper Paleolithic period (10,000-40,000 years ago) and even earlier. ↩︎.

In the biblical story of Adam and Eve, God places his human creations in the Garden of Eden, and tells them they can freely eat of every tree of the garden except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, “for when you eat from it you will certainly die,” God warns.

For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”. Advertisement.

As the serpent promised, they don’t die and their eyes are indeed opened to the existence of good, evil and shame (they were naked. ).

Later Christian theologians cast Satan in the role of the serpent, but to the ancient authors of Genesis, the snake represented an even older mythological figure: the trickster. In mythology, a trickster is a slippery figure who inhabits both the heavenly and earthly realms and refuses to play by anyone’s rules.

“A trickster being involved with the creation of the world as we know it is a very prominent theme,” says Thury, citing the example of Raven in Native American creation myths of the Pacific Northwest. Raven is at once a shape-shifting trickster and a creator god, creating land by dropping grains of sand into the sea, and the rivers by spitting out stolen water.

He brings light to the world, for example, by pretending he’s a newborn baby and crying incessantly until the ancient “grandfather” releases the stars, sun and moon. In classical Greek mythology, Prometheus is the top trickster.

Prometheus is punished for his treachery, condemned by Zeus to have his liver eaten by an eagle every day for eternity. Compare Prometheus to the serpent in the Garden of Eden.

And both were punished for it. Prometheus had his liver eternally consumed and the serpent was damned to wallow on its belly and be hated by humans.

[…] Who Was the Wife of Cain. […].

– Biblical Archaeology Society […]. […] Who Was the Wife of Cain.

Read a study bible or the Amplified version. The wife Cain took was one of Adam’s descendants.

Cain was cast out and he went into the land of nod and there he took a wife… I mean that is so clear in its meaning and inference most people can get it. The real issue is that the creation story is not original to the Hebrew people.

The Samarians told this story well before, along with the flood story and many others. The issue is that there was things lost in translation from Samarian to the Hebrew, and then even more lost or changed out right from Greek to Latin in the roman style to take control of a religion in a region they have concurred.

Who gave birth to the wife of cain ？. Who created the wife of cain ？.

This is strictly the history of the Jew. Adam and Eve were the beginning of the Jewish people only.

Except that nobody from Adam to Abram was a Jew. Utterly ridiculous – There were no Jews until Judah was born.

Foxtrot Oscar Alpha Delta, John. The Israelite tribes were descendants of Abraham as his 12 Great-Grandsons are the titular founders.

However, enough members of the tribe survived to keep their monotheistic religion which took its name from Judah. How abt his marrying a Neanderthal who also roamed the region.

My thought on this subject is. that God had created men and women but without His God Spirit.

They were created for a totally different purpose. God created them to be a legacy He wanted children with His Heart and His thoughts, and His powers (eventually) But they failed the test.

the women that the angels cohabited with that became Giants Everything and everyone got out of hand. They had far too much wisdom and far too much power to be in control of God’s Planet.

God had to destroy them all.

Thank you Lord for Noah Anyway it’s much more complicated than this, but these are the basics as to what my studies have found, while studying under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

Have a great day.

I have questioned this subject for fifty years and have finally concluded that my salvation is not required to know what happened to Cain and his life other than he was the first killer. Now that said, I am more interested in what my creator took from Adam and made Eve his soulmate.

You see we are quite happy to believe that a rib was taken from Adam and made Eve. It seems to me that it is strange the woman and man have the same number of ribs so GOD must have copied the rib to do that, however, my Bible says a curve was taken from Adam to make Eve..

If we look at shapes of men and women we see a major difference in them. The men’s shoulders and hips are equal in width while the ladies shoulders are more narrow than their hips and their bodies appear more curves.

Also I wonder what really happened between the winged serpent and Eve when she said he beguiled her. Cain’s wife is a curious subject but the the size of the animals on the ark are also.

Such as, could it have been in America and the garden being say around the area on St. Louis.

We are given no indication as to how old Cain was when he killed Abel or when he was married. He could have been 100 years old which is the same approximate age the three sons of Noah were when they entered the ark.

Cain could have married his sister or even his niece. If we add some other group of people not descended from Adam and Eve, the entire story of the Tree of Knowledge and Tree of Life and the 7 day creation and Adam’s longing for a helpmeet which is then made from his side becomes nonsensical.

If Adam and Eve ate the fruit while others didn’t then there would be immortal human beings and they would not have remained on this miserable sin filled planet but God would have taken them elsewhere.

Consider that the word “Adam” means something other than a physical man and “Eve” also has another meaning past a name. I can’t apply the literal history of the “first couple” to my life, so why would it matter except to satisfy curiosity.

Also, we know that when in harmony and love a new physical child is born, so is the balance between Adam and Eve in the spiritual sense, that means new “birth” for we who already exist. Now, I can apply these meanings to my life and understand the differences.

Cain could have physically married another human being that had not received the “breath” of God. To me, the understanding of the first family is in the connection God had with them, and not whether or not there was another first family somewhere, or physical incest.

If you read Genesis Chapter 1 verse 26 It says “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness & have Dominion over.Etc. This is before Adam & Eve, This is when the races of men were created There were people outside of the Garden, Adam & Eve came after in Chapter 2.

A couple of interesting points are: 1. in verse 5 it points out that the vegetation was watered by a mist – no rain……….that did not come until after the flood…….a lucid canopy of water surrounded the earth on the outer edge of the atmosphere…….that is where the water came from for the flood……the entire earth was tropical back then.

Notice he was OK with that until Eve came along and in Genesis 3:12 Adam blamed God for giving him the woman………….now, I wonder where have I heard that before.

Adam and Eve, according to the creation myth[Note 1] of the Abrahamic religions, were the first man and woman. They are central to the belief that humanity is in essence a single family, with everyone descended from a single pair of original ancestors.

In the Book of Genesis of the Hebrew Bible, chapters one through five, there are two creation narratives with two distinct perspectives. In the first, Adam and Eve are not named.

In the second narrative, God fashions Adam from dust and places him in the Garden of Eden. Adam is told that he can eat freely of all the trees in the garden, except for a tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

They are innocent and unembarrassed about their nakedness. However, a serpent convinces Eve to eat fruit from the forbidden tree, and she gives some of the fruit to Adam.

God later curses the serpent and the ground. God prophetically tells the woman and the man what will be the consequences of their sin of disobeying God.

Neither Adam nor Eve is mentioned elsewhere in the Hebrew scriptures apart from a single listing of Adam in a genealogy in 1 Chronicles 1:1, suggesting that although their story came to be prefixed to the Jewish story, it has little in common with it. The myth underwent extensive elaboration in later Abrahamic traditions, and it has been extensively analyzed by modern biblical scholars.

for example, the Islamic version of the story holds that Adam and Eve were equally responsible for their sins of hubris, instead of Eve being the first one to be unfaithful. The story of Adam and Eve is often depicted in art, and it has had an important influence in literature and poetry.

The opening chapters of the Book of Genesis provide a mythic history of the infiltration of evil into the world. God places the first man and woman (Adam and Eve) in his Garden of Eden, whence they are expelled.

a new humanity then descends from these and spreads throughout the world, but although the new world is as sinful as the old, God has resolved never again to destroy the world by flood, and the History ends with Terah, the father of Abraham, from whom will descend God’s chosen people, the Israelites.

Adam and Eve are the Bible’s first man and first woman. Adam’s name appears first in Genesis 1 with a collective sense, as “mankind”.

In these chapters God fashions “the man” (ha adam) from earth (adamah), breathes life into his nostrils, and makes him a caretaker over creation. God next creates for the man an ezer kenegdo, a “helper corresponding to him”, from his side or rib.

She is called ishsha, “woman”, because, the text says, she is formed from ish, “man”. The man receives her with joy, and the reader is told that from this moment a man will leave his parents to “cling” to a woman, the two becoming one flesh.

The first man and woman are in God’s Garden of Eden, where all creation is vegetarian and there is no violence. They are permitted to eat the fruits of all the trees except one, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

(Contrary to popular myth she does not beguile the man, who appears to have been present at the encounter with the serpent). God curses all three, the man to a lifetime of hard labour followed by death, the woman to the pain of childbirth and to subordination to her husband, and the serpent to go on his belly and suffer the enmity of both man and woman.

The story continues in Genesis 3 with the “expulsion from Eden” narrative. A form analysis of Genesis 3 reveals that this portion of the story can be characterized as a parable or “wisdom tale” in the wisdom tradition.

This characterization is determined by the narrative’s format, settings, and the plot. The form of Genesis 3 is also shaped by its vocabulary, making use of various puns and double entendres.

The expulsion from Eden narrative begins with a dialogue between the woman and a serpent, identified in Genesis 3:1 as an animal that was more crafty than any other animal made by God, although Genesis does not identify the serpent with Satan. The woman is willing to talk to the serpent and respond to the creature’s cynicism by repeating God’s prohibition against eating fruit from the tree of knowledge (Genesis 2:17).

The serpent assures the woman that God will not let her die if she ate the fruit, and, furthermore, that if she ate the fruit, her “eyes would be opened” and she would “be like God, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:5). The woman sees that the fruit of the tree of knowledge is a delight to the eye and that it would be desirable to acquire wisdom by eating the fruit.

With this the man and woman recognize their own nakedness, and they make loincloths of fig leaves (Genesis 3:7).

The man explains that he hid in the garden out of fear because he realized his own nakedness (Genesis 3:10). This is followed by two more rhetorical questions designed to show awareness of a defiance of God’s command.

God challenges the woman to explain herself, and she shifts the blame to the serpent (Genesis 3:13).

A judgement oracle and the nature of the crime is first laid upon the serpent, then the woman, and, finally, the man. On the serpent, God places a divine curse.

The man’s penalty results in God cursing the ground from which he came, and the man then receives a death oracle, although the man has not been described, in the text, as immortal. : 18 Abruptly, in the flow of text, in Genesis 3:20, the man names the woman “Eve” (Hebrew hawwah), “because she was the mother of all living”.

The chiasmus structure of the death oracle given to Adam in Genesis 3:19 is a link between man’s creation from “dust” (Genesis 2:7) to the “return” of his beginnings: “you return, to the ground, since from it you were taken, for dust you are, and to dust, you will return.”. The garden account ends with an intradivine monologue, determining the couple’s expulsion, and the execution of that deliberation (Genesis 3:22–24).

and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever” (Genesis 3:22). : 18 God exiles Adam and Eve from the Garden and installs cherubs (supernatural beings that provide protection) and the “ever-turning sword” to guard the entrance (Genesis 3:24).

Genesis 4 narrates life outside the garden, including the birth of Adam and Eve’s first children Cain and Abel and the story of the first murder. A third son, Seth, is born to Adam and Eve, and Adam had “other sons and daughters” (Genesis 5:4).

Adam’s age at death is given as 930 years. According to the Book of Jubilees, Cain married his sister Awan, a daughter of Adam and Eve.

The Primeval History forms the opening chapters of the Torah, the five books making up the history of the origins of Israel.

The Adam and Eve Story And What It Means To Be Born Again. To really understand how we all got here, what it really means to be “born again,” and why there is so much death and destruction in the world we live in – you have to go back to the very beginning to the Adam and Eve story as told to us in the Bible.

I will go ahead and break the story of Adam and Eve down under the following captions. 1.

There are many secular and atheistic teachers and professors who are teaching in our high schools and colleges that man gradually evolved rather than actually being created by our Lord. However, the Bible tells us otherwise.

The very first verse in the Bible tells us that God created the heavens and the earth. Here it is:

The Bible then goes on to tell us that God then proceeds to create light, night and day, the seas, the stars, creatures to live in the seas, creatures to live on the dry land, and then finally the man Adam – all in 6 days. Adam was created on the 6th day.

“And the Lord FORMED MAN of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. and man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7).

After a certain period of time, God then sees that it is not good that Adam continue to remain alone – so He then creates the first woman Eve by causing a deep sleep to fall on Adam and then takes out one of his ribs. God literally creates the first woman from the rib of Adam.

Here is the verse that specifically tells us that Eve was also created just like Adam was, and that she too was not a product of some type of evolutionary process. “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept.

Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man HE MADE INTO A WOMAN, and He brought her to the man.” (Genesis 2:21). Again, both of these accounts show that both Adam and Eve were created by God and that they did not evolve from any kind of evolutionary process or any kind of primates.

After God brings Eve to Adam to be his helper, Adam makes a very powerful statement that has future implications for all married people. Here is what he says in reference to Eve:

Bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh – two people becoming one flesh. These words right there tell you why divorce and marital breakups are so painful.

This is why divorce is so painful when one or both of the partners try to break it off. There is a spiritual union that occurs when two people marry for true love.

Then the Bible says that God now puts man in the Garden of Eden to tend and keep it. The stage is now set.

They have both been made in the image and likeness of God. They now have each other as marriage mates.

He has told them that they are free to be fruitful and multiply – which means they are free to start having children within the marriage union. And then to really top it off, they both have direct contact and fellowship with God Himself, as this account says that God walked in the Garden of Eden where they were now living.

However, there was just one small catch. – The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

After God perfectly sets the above stage for Adam and Eve and literally gives them everything under the sun, He tells them that there is now one thing they cannot do. He specifically tells them they can eat of every single tree that is in this garden – with the exception of one little tree.

Think about this. God makes this test they both had to pass for the future implication of all mankind as easy as He possibly could.

He tells them that they can literally eat from every other tree that is in this garden. The Bible does not tell us how many other trees were in this garden – but I bet there were thousands of them.

But they blew it big time – not only for themselves – but also for the rest of mankind that was to follow after them. In addition to telling them not to eat any fruit that was on this one tree, God then allowed one other thing to occur in this setu.

He allowed Satan himself to be able to roam in this garden in the form of a serpent – knowing full well that Satan would try and tempt them to disobey His direct command not to eat any fruit off this one forbidden tree. So God sits back and watches this scenario unfold.

As we all know, they eventually fell for Satan’s lies and deception. Satan first targets Eve, telling her that she will be like God if she eats the fruit off this one forbidden tree.

After Eve trespasses and eats some of the fruit off this forbidden tree, she then turns to Adam and convinces him to do the same thing. Adam then proceeds to eat some of the same fruit, and once both of them have eaten off this tree – an amazing thing then happens.

Before they had eaten off this forbidden tree, the Bible tells us that they literally were allowed to run naked in this garden. They had no shame in doing this.

Until they had transgressed by eating off this one forbidden tree, they had no sin in their lives. When they ate off this forbidden tree, they had committed their first sin against God – and what happened after they did.

They then proceeded to sew fig leaves together so they could cover their nakedness. Why all of a sudden would they want to cover their nakedness when they had been running around totally naked in this garden for who knows how long before this transgression took place.

I believe the main reason was due to the fact that shame, guilt, and condemnation immediately set in the minute they committed their first sin and transgression against God. The minute this shame, guilt, and condemnation set in as a result of committing their first sin against God – they lost all of their childlike innocence and purity.

Why was it so bad that Adam and Eve ate the fruit off of this forbidden tree. It was just fruit.

So what was so bad about eating this fruit besides disobeying a direct command from God not to eat of it. What did this fruit represent.

Besides disobeying a direct command from God the Father, I believe there was another reason that God did not want them eating any fruit off this one tree. The clue is in what the tree was called – “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.”.

Instead of fruit being on this tree, imagine there was a bag of pot, cocaine, or heroin. God’s original plan and design for all of us was that we not even attempt to experiment, even one time, with anything that is sinful such as some of the above items.

Once you cross over the line even one time to try and smoke pot, shoot up heroin, or snort cocaine – you now have the knowledge of something that is sinful and evil because you have now ingested it – you have now taken it in – you have now officially tried it out. That is why this tree was called the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil.”.

I am grateful for this opportunity to engage with this new book by computational biologist S. Joshua Swamidass of Washington University in St.

The ideas in The Genealogical Adam & Eve (GAE) have their genesis several years ago, and represent a fuller exposition of material on the Henry Center’s Sapientia web site, a PSCF article, and a post on Swamidass’s Peaceful Science web site. GAE adds new, provocative ideas to consider that are consistent with the science we know and a range of faithful approaches to the biblical text.

We have seen far too many Christians who feel that they must make a false choice between science and their faith, and we want to help our secular colleagues to see that Christian faith is no impediment to taking science seriously.[i] Unlike Swamidass my own upbringing was not marked by a sense of conflict between science and Christian faith[ii], whereas Swamidass comes from a Young Earth Creationist (YEC) background (p.

Swamidass no longer holds this view. as the Peaceful Science forum puts it, he “affirms mainstream science, including evolutionary science, the common descent of all living things (including humans), methodological naturalism (though he thinks it’s incorrectly named), and an old earth.”.

The claim that recent, special creation of Adam & Eve (A&E) as ancestors of everyone alive today is incompatible with modern science is certainly one of these. In contrast, Swamidass makes this case (p.

“Whatever one believes about Adam and Eve, evolutionary science does not require us to reject the Genesis narrative. Adam and Eve, ancestors of us all, could have lived as recently as six thousand years ago in the Middle East…it is possible that Adam was created out of dust, and Eve out of his rib, less than ten thousand years ago.

In a few thousand years, they would become genealogical ancestors of everyone.”. Swamidass may or may not hold this view.

GAE is more interested in establishing a paradigm involving genealogical science, which is capable of being folded into numerous views. Although the recent de novo creation of A&E received the most attention, genealogical ancestry is a fairly flexible paradigm, and does not depend on a particular mode of creation or calling of A&E.

Swamidass makes two “corrections” about universal ancestry via A&E (p. 12): “1.

Human is a multivalent term, with many definitions.” For me the most penetrating insight in this book, (see especially Ch. 3), is that we moderns tend to think in terms of genetics.

As the DNA from the gametes of one parent unite with the DNA from gametes from another parent, the total contribution of DNA from the parent with the “labeled” DNA is diminished by half and continues in each successive generation in a process another geneticist has called “homeopathic dilution”.

This would be a major mistake. People alive today carry in their genomes an evolved history, something Swamidass affirms[iv].

The other point of this “correction” is that the OT cannot be talking about modern genetics.[vi] The Bible’s focus is on genealogy, the connection by lineal descent of parents to their progeny.[vii] This is an important reminder for biblical studies, but Swamidass invites us to consider how genealogies work scientifically.

The basic counterintuitive point about genealogies is easy to grasp. Each of us has two parents, each of our two parents had two parents (our grandparents), and so forth.

This paradox is resolved, however, once we recognize that we share many ancestors in common. The mathematics of genealogical ancestry led Rohde et al (2004)[x] to the conclusion that the Most Recent Universal Genealogical Ancestors (MRUGAs) of people alive today lived as recently as 5000 years ago.

there are many UGAs of people alive today. Importantly, few genealogical ancestors leave a genetic trace.

In their paper, Rohde et al admit there is one major uncertainty in their modeling: the effect of strong geographical isolation. They mention Tasmania, which may have been completely impassable from the Australian mainland starting about 14,000 years ago until fairly recently.

Even so MRUGAs would still be remarkably recent. GAE is unique in that it is the first[xi] thorough application of these genealogical studies to the question of Adam and Eve.

Swamidass sets this time frame because it comports (a) with how many conservative Christians read their Bibles, and (b) with how many interpret Paul in Acts 17:26. How then does the apparent evidence from paleoanthropology, human genomes of today and the genomes of hominins from the past square with a recent, de novo creation of a special pair.

henceforth POTG), GAE’s shorthand for a group of individuals carrying an evolved history in their genomes capable of interbreeding with A&E’s descendants. This solves the perennial problem of where Cain got his wife (Gen.

I was very interested in Swamidass’s description of Young Earth Creationists who appear to be open to the notion of biologically compatible beings “outside the garden”. An entailment of GAE is substantial biological compatibility of the progeny of a de novo created pair with POTG.

the similarity might need to be deep (p. 80).

What we would then expect in the present is what we see: genetic evidence that Homo sapiens arose through common descent, all while preserving the possibility that A&E are genealogical UGAs who have left no detectable trace genetically. This is a valuable clarification.

Because it opens up new possibilities for Christians committed to our lineal descent from an historical A&E who may have been told that science made this impossible[xvi].

But for some Christians, such as Darrel Falk, GAE came as a surprise. As Falk says on the GAE dust jacket:

In this book, Joshua Swamidass effectively demonstrates that people like me, stuck in a specific genetic paradigm, were wrong… I failed to appreciate the biblical ramifications of this fact. The other “correction” in GAE is the focus of Part 3: lack of clarity surrounding the word “human” and related terms.

Is there any more controversial couple in the history of the world than the first couple, Adam and Eve. Is there any couple in the Bible in which we see more of ourselves.

If they grew up in church, Adam and Eve’s is the first Bible story that many people heard about as children. Church attenders of a certain age remember cartoon renderings of this couple dressed in fig leaves or hiding behind bushes from their Sunday school fliers.

But wherever they are first encountered, the accounts of this first couple and their family have fascinated billions of people from around the world since the first time this story was passed down. The images are colorful and incredible: Adam, the first man, formed from the dust, lives alone in an earthly paradise.

And yet, even in this optimal situation, something was missing. God himself declared the fact that Adam was alone “not good” (Genesis 2:18).

Adam sleeps, then wakes up, and there is Eve. Anyone who has ever been in a relationship understands how difficult they can be, even under the best circumstances.

Everything was so, so good. Until it wasn’t.

While this excellent question has been debated for centuries, the purpose of this post is not to argue whether Adam and Eve were actual individuals. Entire schools of thought featuring some of the world’s most brilliant biblical scholars have developed this argument well beyond the scope of this article.

John Walton, in his excellent commentary in the NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, writes about the question of Adam and Eve as individuals when he says,. In Genesis 2 there are archetypal elements that are identifiable.

The creation of Eve from Adam’s side (Genesis 2:21–23) likewise expresses a relationship between man and woman that permeates the race. In these Adam and Eve are archetypes representing all of humanity in their creation, just as they do in their sin and their destiny (death) in Genesis 3.

it only suggests that they function more importantly as representatives of the race.

let’s look at what the Bible’s book of Genesis actually says about Adam and Eve. The first few chapters of this book reveal the following about these two people, whom it portrays as actual individuals who became parts of a connected whole—the two people who would come together to form the basis for the rest of humanity.

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”. So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them.

God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number. fill the earth and subdue it.

This is what we learn about the creation of Adam, from Genesis 2 and 3: Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

and there he put the man he had formed. (Genesis 2:7-8).

And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden. but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” (Genesis 2:15-17).

The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky.

and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.

So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep. and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh.

The man said,. “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh.

Again, here we have two people living in absolutely perfect conditions. These two were happily communing with their Creator, seemingly immune to the conflicts that those of us who are in committed relationships (or, for that matter, any relationship with any other person) can find so frustrating and difficult.

That hardly seems possible given the optimal relational circumstances they found themselves in. However, the Bible does say that we are, like Adam and Eve were, made in the image of God.

male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). What does it mean that mankind was made in the image of God.

John Walton, again in the NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, writes about the idea of being made “in the image” of something that will help inform our discussion.

The biblical view is … people were created in the image of God, embodying his qualities and doing his work. They are symbols of his presence and act on his behalf as his representatives.

“Image” refers to the something that contains the “essence” of something else, while “likeness” is more connected to “substance,” expressing a resemblance at some level.

Just as Seth bore the “likeness and image” of his father Adam (Genesis 5:3), God made Adam and Eve to bear his image and likeness. Historical theology has often grounded the image of God in mankind’s superiority over lesser creatures, given man’s higher rationality and spirituality, and especially in human’s capacity to know and worship God.

The emphasis in Genesis 1:26 on man’s dominion above the other creatures argues for mankind’s viceregency in accountability to God. New Testament reflection on the divine image highlights that [humanity] was made for covenant communion with God in righteousness and holiness.

So we see in Adam and Eve the likeness of God in many ways. a likeness that we still reflect today.

• have a capacity to know God, • to work for his purposes in the world, • to love God and one another, and • to be held accountable to God for the ways we follow his commands (or don’t). Now let’s take a look at what the Bible says in Genesis about Adam and Eve’s fabled fall from God’s good graces:

He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’. ”.

“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”.

She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked.

The cover story in Christianity Today in June 2011 was “The Search for the Historical Adam.” The subtitle read, “Some scholars believe genome science casts doubt on the existence of the first man and woman. Others say the integrity of the faith requires it.” The number of professing evangelical scholars doubting or denying a literal Adam and Eve has continued to grow.

Others say that Adam and Eve were the first two humans but that they evolved from ape-like creatures and became human when God breathed into them. Others say they really existed but that Adam was merely the head of a clan or tribe: Adam and Eve weren’t the only humans at that time but were chosen by God for His purposes.

So what is the truth and does it really matter anyway, as long as you believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. Good question.

The historicity of Adam is abundantly clear from both the Old and New Testaments. Right from the beginning, the text describes real time and names people and places.

Genesis 2 describes the location of the Garden of Eden and names four rivers. Genesis 4 names the city that Cain built.

The eleven occurrences of the Hebrew word toledoth scattered through Genesis (in Genesis 2:4, 5:1, 6:9, 10:1, and so on) and translated as “this the account of” or “these are the generations of” tie the whole book together as one historical record. Few evangelicals doubt the historicity of Genesis 12–50, but there is no break in the literary style between chapters Genesis 11 and Genesis 12.

The genealogies of Genesis 5 and Genesis 11 connect Adam to Noah to Abraham so that all of the men named were equally historical. The Hebrew verb forms in Genesis 1, which is often claimed to be a unique genre, show conclusively that the first chapter of the Bible is historical narrative just like the rest of Genesis.1.

Luke 3:23–38 traces the lineage of Jesus back through David and Abraham to Adam. All those named in Jesus’ genealogy must be real historical people or else Jesus is descended from a metaphor or myth.

1 Corinthians 15:21–22) and that Eve was created from Adam and was deceived by Satan (1 Corinthians 11:8–9. 2 Corinthians 11:3.

Although John and Peter don’t mention Adam or Eve directly, John refers to Cain’s murder of Abel as historical (1 John 3:11–12). And Peter believed that the account of the Flood was just as historical as the account of the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah, even emphasizing that only eight people were saved in the Ark (1 Peter 3:20.

Jude says that Enoch was in the seventh generation after Adam (Jude 14). Jesus certainly believed that Noah, the Ark, and the Flood were historical (Matthew 24:37–39), as were the accounts of the murder of Abel (Luke 11:50–51) and the transformation of Lot’s wife into salt (Luke 17:28–32).

There is no question that the biblical writers and Jesus took Genesis 1–11 as straightforward history and that Moses intended it to be understood that way.2. So Adam and Eve were literal, historical people who literally fell in sin in the Garden of Eden after Eve listened to the deceiving words of the serpent.

Scripture is crystal clear that Adam was the first man (1 Corinthians 15:45) and that Eve was the first woman, the mother of the human race (Genesis 3:20). There were no humans before them.

In Genesis 1 there is a clear distinction between the supernatural creation of the first plants, animals, and man and woman (by God’s Word: “let there be.

The Bible also absolutely rules out the idea that Adam and Eve’s bodies evolved from some pre-existing ape-like creature. In Genesis 1 the first two humans were made distinct from the plants and land, sea, and flying creatures.

So mankind was categorically distinct. Genesis 2:7 informs us that God made Adam from dust, breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and he became a “living being.”3 These two words are a translation of the Hebrew nephesh chayyah.

2:19. and 9:10 to describe sea creatures, land animals, and birds.

So God did not make a living creature, breathe into it, and transform it into man. God did not make Adam from a pre-existing living creature.

But there is no legitimate way to interpret “from his rib” to mean “from a pre-existing hominid distinct from Adam.” This verse cannot possibly be harmonized with the evolution story without doing great violence to the text. It describes supernatural surgery.

Not only does the Bible teach us that Adam and Eve were supernaturally created as the first two humans who rebelled against God resulting in death. This has also been orthodox Christian teaching from the beginning of the church, as William VanDoodewaard has demonstrated.4.

Exodus 20:8–11 says that God created heaven, Earth, and the seas, and all that is in them in six days, the very same kind of days as in a human workweek. God didn’t create anything before the six days because those days began in Genesis 1:1.

In Mark 10:6 and 13:19 He reveals His belief that Adam and Eve were at the beginning of creation, not billions of years after the beginning, as in an evolutionary view.5 Paul believed the same, for in Romans 1:20 he says that people have seen the witness of the creation to the existence and nature of the Creator “since the creation of the world.” This only makes sense if Adam were created on the sixth day of Creation Week.

Therefore the geological record of rock layers and fossils cannot represent an earth history of hundreds of millions of years before man, as evolutionists assert.6 Furthermore, if there really were millions of years before Adam, then most of the animals lived and died before Adam and Eve could rule over them, as God commanded (Genesis 1:26), and for most of their existence the sun, moon, and stars could not serve one of the three divine purposes for which they were created: for man to tell time (as well as for dividing night and day and for giving light on the Earth.

The Apostle Paul inseparably connects Jesus to Adam. Jesus came to rectify the damage done by Adam (Romans 5:12–19.

Adam brought sin and death into the world. Jesus brought righteousness and life into the world.

We are all sinners in need of a Savior because we inherited our sin nature from Adam and have rebelled against God just as he did. No Adam: no gospel.

The American Atheists understand this better than many Christians: Some professing Christians are beginning to reason in a similar way and radically change the meaning of the death of Jesus.8 Physicist Karl Giberson, a prominent theistic evolutionist and past Executive VP for BioLogos, recently wrote the following:

Both of these claims have been thoroughly refuted by PhD geneticist Jeffrey Tomkins at the Institute for Creation Research.11 The fossil evidence doesn’t support human evolution either. Rather the public is being deceived by assumptions and artistic imagination masquerading as scientific fact.12.

The Evolution of US Trucking: A Journey Through HistoryAndrei TapalagaDecember 13, 2023“History never looks like history when you are living through it.”–-John W. Gardner.

From burns and smoke inhalation to physical injuries and mental Read moreElectrifying Progress: A Comprehensive History of Electric CarsAndrei TapalagaDecember 11, 2023The history of electric cars is a captivating journey that spans over a century, marked by innovation, setbacks, and remarkable Read more.

Gardner. From its humble origins with horse-drawn carts to Read moreThe Fight Against ‘Forever Chemicals’: What Firefighters Need to Know to Stay SafeAndrei TapalagaDecember 13, 2023For generations, firefighters have put their lives on the line.

The Evolution of US Trucking: A Journey Through HistoryAndrei TapalagaDecember 13, 2023“History never looks like history when you are living through it.”–-John W. Gardner.

The Evolution of US Trucking: A Journey Through HistoryAndrei TapalagaDecember 13, 2023“History never looks like history when you are living through it.”–-John W. Gardner.

The Evolution of US Trucking: A Journey Through HistoryAndrei TapalagaDecember 13, 2023“History never looks like history when you are living through it.”–-John W. Gardner.

The Evolution of US Trucking: A Journey Through History. Andrei Tapalaga.

“History never looks like history when you are living through it.”–-John W. Gardner.

The Fight Against ‘Forever Chemicals’: What Firefighters Need to Know to Stay SafeAndrei TapalagaDecember 13, 2023For generations, firefighters have put their lives on the line. From burns and smoke inhalation to physical injuries and mental Read more.

From burns and smoke inhalation to physical injuries and mental Read more.

The Fight Against ‘Forever Chemicals’: What Firefighters Need to Know to Stay SafeAndrei TapalagaDecember 13, 2023For generations, firefighters have put their lives on the line. From burns and smoke inhalation to physical injuries and mental Read more.

Andrei Tapalaga. December 13, 2023.

From burns and smoke inhalation to physical injuries and mental Read more. Electrifying Progress: A Comprehensive History of Electric CarsAndrei TapalagaDecember 11, 2023The history of electric cars is a captivating journey that spans over a century, marked by innovation, setbacks, and remarkable Read more.

Electrifying Progress: A Comprehensive History of Electric CarsAndrei TapalagaDecember 11, 2023The history of electric cars is a captivating journey that spans over a century, marked by innovation, setbacks, and remarkable Read more. Electrifying Progress: A Comprehensive History of Electric Cars.

December 11, 2023. The history of electric cars is a captivating journey that spans over a century, marked by innovation, setbacks, and remarkable Read more.

Were cavemen created when Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden.

Were they created before Adam and Eve or when Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden. The following will address these questions.

Adam was the first man God created according to the chronological sequence given in Genesis 1:26-27 and Genesis 2:20. Then in 1 Corinthians 15:45 we are told explicitly that Adam was the first man.

1 Corinthians 15:45 (NASB). It should be noted that 1 Chronicles 1:1 starts its genealogy of early man with Adam.

Also Luke 3:38 lists the genealogy of mankind and indicates that Adam came from God. Humanity started with Adam and not another creature or a different man.

Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. and man became a living being.

It is important to note that cavemen or some other species were not our ancestors. 1 Corinthians 15:38-39 clearly states animals, birds, fish and mankind are not related to one another either.

“It is associated with bones, muscles, sinews, veins, viscera, and blood.” Therefore, Adam was uniquely created. He did not evolve from other animals, ape-like ancestors, or some other prehistoric creature.

In addition, 1 Timothy 2:13 states that Adam was created before Eve. From a logical perspective, if we assume for discussion that Adam and Eve evolved separately, then the evolution of Eve had to happen rapidly so that she and Adam could have children in order to continue the human race.

Fundamentally, the evolutionary theory presupposes millions and billions of years in order to make the theory work because otherwise it is mathematically impossible. In truth, it is an untenable theory.

The theory also cannot be supported by Scripture. Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day of creation.

Adam and Eve are not described as being a caveman and cave woman. The most significant statement made about them is that God created them in His own image (Genesis 1:27).

God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him. male and female He created them.

Since God is a spirit (John 4:24) it is obvious that “in the image of God” did not mean that Adam and Eve would look like Him. Instead God was referring to His communicable attributes (Romans 8:29.

James 3:29). This would also include intellect (Genesis 2:15-17.

We are never told what Adam and Eve looked like physically. But Genesis 2:21 states that they had flesh, sides and ribs.

Genesis 2:24. 3:11 reveals that they had genitals.

Genesis 3:10-11 reveals that they had a conscience and felt guilty for disobeying God. They were fully human and not physically defective.

3:23-24 states that Adam and Eve lived in a garden for awhile until they sinned. Where did they live after they were driven out of the Garden of Eden.

Did they live in caves. It is possible that they lived in a cave.

Now we must ask a question. If we assume that cavemen existed and they lived in caves, what happened as the population increased.

Are there enough caves in the world. Now for a serious response, just because some bones have been found in a cave does not mean the entire population lived in caves.

Furthermore, Genesis 4 states that the population lived in cities (Genesis 4:17). The early population farmed (Genesis 4:3, 12) and raised livestock and made tents (Genesis 4:2, 4, 20).

By Genesis 4 we discover that mankind was very intelligent, talented and industrious. Genesis does not give us any supporting evidence for the modern concept of an evolutionary hypothesis, including the existence of ape-like creatures or cavemen.

Scripture assumes from Genesis to Revelation that man was uniquely created by God and that man is uniquely different from the rest of the living creatures on the planet. Every human alive today is a descendant of Adam and Eve.

Later Noah’s flood destroyed the world. Therefore, we can also say that every human alive today is a descendant of Noah and his children, and our origin is from the area of Babel (Genesis 11).

Ceslas Spicq and James D. Ernest, Theological Lexicon of the New Testament (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994), 231.

“Skepticism About Darwinian Evolution Grows as 1,000+ Scientists Share Their Doubts.” Evolution News & Science Today (evolutionnews.org/author/evolutionnews/) 3. A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM ( 4.

Andrew A. Snelling and Mike Matthews.

”, April 1, 2012, (answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/cavemen/when-did-cavemen-live/).

What is the Catholic position concerning belief or unbelief in evolution. The question may never be finally settled, but there are definite parameters to what is acceptable Catholic belief.

Vatican I solemnly defined that everyone must “confess the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, as regards their whole substance, have been produced by God from nothing” (Canons on God the Creator of All Things, canon 5). Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time.

Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul.

take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God” (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created.

While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution. Much less has been defined as to when the universe, life, and man appeared.

Catholics should weigh the evidence for the universe’s age by examining biblical and scientific evidence. “Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason.

It is outside the scope of this tract to look at the scientific evidence, but a few words need to be said about the interpretation of Genesis and its six days of creation. While there are many interpretations of these six days, they can be grouped into two basic methods of reading the account—a chronological reading and a topical reading.

This view is often coupled with the claim that the six days were standard 24-hour days. Some have denied that they were standard days on the basis that the Hebrew word used in this passage for day (yom) can sometimes mean a longer-than-24-hour period (as it does in Genesis 2:4).

At the end of each one is a formula like, “And there was evening and there was morning, one day” (Gen. 1:5).

Genesis is presenting these days to us as 24-hour, solar days. If we are not meant to understand them as 24-hour days, it would most likely be because Genesis 1 is not meant to be understood as a literal chronological account.

Pope Pius XII warned us, “What is the literal sense of a passage is not always as obvious in the speeches and writings of the ancient authors of the East, as it is in the works of our own time. For what they wished to express is not to be determined by the rules of grammar and philology alone, nor solely by the context.

For the ancient peoples of the East, in order to express their ideas, did not always employ those forms or kinds of speech which we use today. but rather those used by the men of their times and countries.

This leads us to the possibility that Genesis 1 is to be given a non-chronological, topical reading. Advocates of this view point out that, in ancient literature, it was common to sequence historical material by topic, rather than in strict chronological order.

In the first three days of creation, God solves the formlessness problem by structuring different.aspects of the environment. On day one he separates day from night.

and on day three he separates the waters below from each other, creating dry land. Thus the world has been given form.

Thus, having solved the problems of formlessness and emptiness, the task he set for himself, God’s work is complete and he rests on the seventh day. Even if Genesis 1 records God’s work in a topical fashion, it still records God’s work—things God really did.

They are accounts of real history, even if they are told in a style of historical writing that Westerners do not typically use. It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen.

A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism). In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty.

Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).

If nevertheless there is a disagreement.

it should be remembered that the sacred writers, or more truly ‘the Spirit of God who spoke through them, did not wish to teach men such truths (as the inner structure of visible objects) which do not help anyone to salvation’.

The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are” (CCC 159). The Catholic Church has no fear of science or scientific discovery.

Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004. IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827 permission to publish this work is hereby granted.

Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004.

[…] For 4,000 years Lilith has wandered the earth, figuring in the mythic imaginations of writers, artists and poets. Her dark origins lie in Babylonian demonology, where amulets and incantations were used to counter the sinister powers of this winged spirit who preyed on pregnant women and infants.

She makes a solitary appearance in the Bible, as a wilderness demon shunned by the prophet Isaiah. In the Middle Ages she reappears in Jewish sources as the dreadful first wife of Adam.

[…] I’m sorry, Eve came from what. […].

In Latin the preposition “in” can also mean “on”. This makes me wonder about the use of “from” or “out of” a rib pulled from Adam’s side.

[…] Source: 🔗 […]. It says in the bible that woman came from man’s rib.

How is this meant to be perceived.

Mitochondrial DNA shows us that every human being (100%) that ever existed descends from Mitochondrial Eve. Mitochondrial DNA tells us that 97% to 98% descend from Mitochondrial Adam.

We are all brothers and sisters, if we like it or not. Love one another.

In ch. 2 of Genesis, Elohim states, “…We will create man in our image…”, which Elohim did.

Elohim stated the man’s helper was the bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh (flesh and bone).

The “Christ wept”, the shortest scripture in the Holy Bible.

Also, a Humble One with everlasting Hope. If the word means “ from the side” as indicated in the article then the logical assumption would be Eve was created from Adam’s side, which would be most closely associated with his ribs.

As an evangelical Christian I believe in the inherency of the Bible as the inspired Word of God. In the scriptures, God often does things that have symbolic meaning.

My believe is man was created from Eve Rib meaning stomach. A man is here to help the woman.

All mam came from a woman. Example Mary had Jesus and good send man to help raise Jesus.

If you all believe in God he will revail the truth of his creations. That is the stupidest thing I’ve ever read in my life take man out of this world and see how a woman will reproduce.

yeah right, take men out of the world and women are gonna all of a sudden get pregnant on their own. Surely no matter which part of Man was used for the creation of Eve – Adam would have been the only person minus that part right.

An Amputee who thereafter fathers children does not produce kids minus the same part ~. Please read a book on Modern Biology and learn about DNA.

Amazing.

you all are playing with words, either way eve was taken from adam. if you believe the bible to be the truth(and i do) the bible inturpits the bible.man was created (brought forth from nothing) gen.1:26-27 then gen 2:5 >>>there was not a man to till the ground so gen 2:7 llllllllllllllll LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground,eve was made from adam’s rib (don’t matter where the bone came from).

don’t expect it to now.

formed is flesh–(human being) human came from dust,we are a created being that will live in etinerity heaven or hell we get to chose. This could be qualified as “fake news” as it misleads young innocent maidens concerning male anatomy.

attracted my attention, I thought the article would deal with her “pre-biblical origin,” I was wrong.

Enkidu is portrayed as being made of Edin’s clay by a goddess, he is hairy and naked and of great strength. His companions are wild animals, bulls and antelope.

He sets free animals caught in the hunter’s traps. Fearful of Enkidu’s strength, the Hunter asks Gilgamesh for help.

When Enkidu arrives with his animal companions, she is to disrobe and entice him with sex. After sex, he will attempt to return to his animal companions, who will reject, and flee from him.

She will convince him to leave EDIN and live in Uruk. No more animals will be released from the hunter’s traps in the EDIN.

His animal companions flee from him, he accepts her as his new companion. Before leaving the watering hole she gives him part of her garment to cover his nakedness, and together, both leave EDIN clothed.

Shamhat intercedes and convinces Enkidu to partake of the food and drink he does so. The shepherds announce, now he is a civilized man and a beast no more, for beasts do not consume the gods’ foods: alcoholic drink and bread (man-processed foods not available to EDIN’s beasts).

His patron god upbraids him, telling him she did him good, she gave him a robe fit for a king to cover his nakedness, she gave him food and drink fit for gods to consume, she gave him as a companion-in-arms, Gilgamesh. A chastened Enkidu withdraws the curse and blesses the Prostitute.

Mattfeld, The garden of Eden Myth: Its Pre-Biblical Origin in Mesopotamian Myths. Illustrated and with maps.

DNA – doing surgery on a human body does not change or alter the DNA structure. When God was completed with Adam, he said, “it was good” which also means “completed” in terms of mans creation.

If man had a “penis bone” then, our DNA code today would have that, and men would have one now. which we don’t.

Then God closed up the skin and fashioned Eve. Let me look real quick at my side…… hmmmm….

oh, look at that…. my RIBS are there.

If we choose to doubt one thing, then we are apt to choose to doubt others. Thank you.

Wow, how far out will some go to get in print. There seems to be absolutely no evidence for this speculation.

checked into that. stats show a rib removed will in fact NOT grow back.

Did Adam have black hair, brown skin, and brown eyes. Was he six feet eleven inches tall.

However, from reading Genesis, and armed with a basic knowledge of genetics, we can learn a lot about what Adam was probably like. But, how much detail can we go into concerning this man.

It is a question I have often been asked. Your navel is really a scar formed from the attachment via the umbilical cord to your mother.

Now think about Adam. Was he born in the same way you or I were.

He was made directly by God from the dust of the earth. In Genesis 2:7 we read,.

He was the first human. In 1 Corinthians 15:45, we read, “Thus it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being.’” Adam was the first man.

If Adam was not born of a woman, he would not have had an umbilical cord, thus no scar, and thus presumably not a navel. Now consider Genesis 2:21–23,.

And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said,.

she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”. Genesis 3:20 states: “The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.” The first woman (the first wife) was made directly from part of Adam.

Adam and Eve were unique. It would seem neither of them would have had a navel.

I have often had people ask me, after reading the passage about the creation of woman, why men don’t have one fewer rib than women if God made Eve from Adam’s side (or rib). The way I answer this is: If a man had an accident and his leg was amputated as a result, and then he married and had children, would all his children have only one leg.

Of course not. This is because the instructions for how we are constructed are contained in the DNA in the nucleus of our cells—in our genes.

All the information in Adam’s genes was still there. And of all the bones in the human body, the ribs are the only ones that can regenerate (grow back) if the sheath of tissue (periosteum) is left when the bone is removed.

Eve was made specially for Adam. This was the first marriage.

In Genesis 2:15, we read, “The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it.” Adam, the first man, was told to work and to look after the garden God had made. This would not have been a chore.

This was a perfect garden. There were no thorns and thistles, as these did not come until after God had cursed the earth.

How different this is to today’s world. Looking after gardens and farming is very different and difficult today.

In Genesis 2:19–20, we are told that Adam named many of the animals. Man has always given names to things.

Anyone who studies taxonomy knows how hard it is to remember any of those names. Adam would not have had this problem because he was made perfect—he would have been as intelligent as a man could ever be.

By the way, to name the animals, Adam must have been able to speak. He must have had a complex language right from the start.

He was made as a mature human being. How different it was for Adam.

Have you ever thought about the fact that Adam did not see God make him. The evidence that God created was all around Adam though.

This means Adam had to have faith in God’s Word concerning where he came from, just as we have to have faith today. But just like Adam, we have plenty of evidence that God created just the way his Word states.

They think it must have been a long period of time. I am often told that there is no way someone could name all of those kinds in one day.

The Bible, though, tells us that the first man, Adam, rebelled against God and sin came into the world. Ever since, the creation has been running down.

The first man had no mistakes when he was made—he was perfect. I think we can get a glimpse (looking through a glass dimly, so to speak) of what Adam was like by observing certain people today.

I have read about people who can play musical instruments brilliantly from a very young age, such as Mozart. Others can do extremely complex mathematical computations in their head, which even advanced computers must be programmed to do.

It almost makes you feel depressed, doesn’t it.

We can’t say for sure, but I suspect Adam had a middle-brown skin shade. All humans have the same basic skin color, just different shades, because of a brownish pigment called melanin.

If we don’t have much of this pigment, we are a very light shade. In The New Answers Book 1, it is explained that from two people having the right mix of dominant and recessive genes for the amount of melanin, all shades of brown in humans could arise.

For the same reason, Adam and Eve probably had brown eyes and dark hair. In a similar sort of way, if Adam had blood group A, and Eve had blood group B, all the ABO blood groups (A, AB, B, O) could arise.

Jewish tradition has it that they had 56 children altogether. Remember, Adam lived for 930 years (Genesis 5:5).

.”), then originally brothers had to marry sisters. (This is also explained in detail in The New Answers Book 1.).

Therefore, if Adam, being the head of the human race, disobeyed, all of his descendants would have to suffer the consequences. Even though Eve was the one tempted by the serpent, and the one who first ate the forbidden fruit, Adam is the one who brought sin into the world, because he was the head of the human race and the one to whom the commandment had first been given.

The first physical death recorded is that of at least one animal when “the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them” (Genesis 3:21). It appears from the text that God killed an animal, shedding its blood, and gave a covering to Adam and Eve.

Hebrews 9:22 states that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.” God requires the shedding of blood for the remission of sins. However, the blood of bulls and goats was not good enough.

If all descendants of Adam now suffered from sin, how could this be accomplished.

God himself came to earth as a man. Jesus Christ, the second member of the Trinity, was born of a woman to become a man so that the perfect sacrifice could be made.

Adam and Eve were real people. But because the best accounts of Adam and Eve are found in the Bible, many critics challenge their existence.

Even Christians, including Bible college and seminary professors, have argued against a historical Adam and Eve. Often because of evolutionary thought, many claim they were mythological or allegorical figures with no basis in actual history.

Our aim is to examine Adam and Eve from the Bible, consider some of the theological implications of believing in a real Adam and Eve, and finally address some of the major challenges to the historicity of the first humans. According to Scripture, Adam and Eve were the first human beings on the planet.

This man, called Adam, was the first human being. But God did not create Adam to be alone.

In the plain reading of Genesis 1–3, we learn that God created the first two people: Adam and Eve. They were placed in the Garden of Eden and given everything they needed: food, work, companionship, and fellowship with God as they walked with him in the cool of the day (Genesis 3:8).

Then something happened. A serpent entered the Garden of Eden to tempt Adam and Eve.

Eve believed the serpent, ate of the fruit, then gave it to Adam who also ate of the fruit (Genesis 3:6). This event was catastrophic.

And true to his word, Adam and Eve began the process of death. The Bible tells us that Adam lived for 930 years and then he died (Genesis 5:5).

Since their sin, every other person born after them was plunged into rebellion against God’s order. That includes you and every other human being you know.

Through Adam’s sin, death came into the world (Romans 5:12). But Jesus demonstrated he has power over death.

Those who are in Christ will not have to suffer the eternal consequences of sin. Through Adam sin entered the world, but through Christ, we can be saved from the punishment of sin.

If you deny a real Adam and real Eve, many of the doctrines in the Bible (including the gospel) would be incoherent. On many occasions, New Testament authors connect a historic Adam and Eve to foundational doctrine and it does not make sense if Adam and Eve were mythological.

By connecting to their real existence and activities, the New Testament overwhelmingly affirms the historicity of Adam and Eve. It’s not possible to deny a real Adam and Eve while at the same time believing the rest of the Bible.

Paul underscores why a historical Adam was so important. “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.” (1 Corinthians 15:22).

But not everyone believes the Bible about Adam and Eve. There are many attempted challenges to the history and theology connected to an actual Adam and Eve.

Evolutionary thought permeates our culture. In its popular form, evolutionists argue for the common descent of human beings from other animals or human-like creatures.

These critics seek to mythologize or allegorize the narrative of the first few chapters of Genesis. For instance, when recounting the narrative of Adam and Eve, The Washington Post proposed:

But is that accurate. This does not read the Bible as an integrated whole.

On numerous occasions, they clearly distinguish historical fact from mythology (1 Timothy 4:7. 2 Peter 1:16).

Later, teachers may have also affirmed the reality of Adam and Eve, but so did the authors of Scripture before them. That’s why a mythological or merely allegorical Adam and Eve does not match the rest of biblical teaching.

In other words, we shouldn’t believe Adam and Eve were real people because we find the primary account of their lives in a poetic section of Scripture. According to this view, Adam and Eve were merely poetic devices.

Jesus and other New Testament authors refer to Adam and Eve as historical figures. That means the biblical authors read the first chapters of Genesis as history.

Terry Mortensen also agrees when he said: The early chapters of Genesis are not poetry, a series of parables or prophetic visions, or mythology.

When we insist that Genesis 1–11 is history, we are not saying that this section of the Bible is only history, i.e., that it was only inspired to satisfy some of our curiosity about origins. It is far more than history, for it teaches theology, morality, and redemption, and those truths are vitally important.

Yet another different challenge is an internal critique of Genesis. God promised Adam and Eve a certain judgment if they ate the forbidden fruit:

Put another way, why didn’t Adam and Eve die immediately when they ate the fruit. Bodie Hodge addresses this supposed contradiction.

The Hebrew is, literally, die-die (muwth-muwth) with two different verb tenses (dying and die), which can be translated as “surely die” or “dying you shall die.” This indicates the beginning of dying, an ingressive sense, which finally culminates with death. At that point, Adam and Eve began to die and would return to dust (Genesis 3:19).

Old Testament authors understood this and used it in such a fashion, but we must remember that English translations can miss some of the nuances. Still others have challenged the historical record in that Adam could not possibly have named all the animal species in one day.

And he must have named all the animals in one day, because that was the rationale for God creating the woman (Genesis 2:20)—since she was also created on day 6. According to Scripture,.

The question is how could Adam have named all the animals on a single day. The narrative strains at believability if we are to believe Adam named millions of animals in less than a day.

In the first day, Adam named all the animals created at that time. It is likely that Adam had to name only a couple thousand proto-species of land animals—a task which could easily have been achieved in a few hours.

This was very doable, even for a person today. Others have challenged the possibility of a historic Adam and Eve on evolutionary grounds.

Mainstream numbers change, but studies have suggested that human and chimp DNA is about 95–99% similar. Is that possible.

Although the DNA studies do confirm similarities between human and chimp DNA, the latest research by geneticist Jeffrey Tomkins puts the similarities closer to 80-88% compared to 95-99%. And that number may be modified even further as more research comes to light.

That is the teaching of a cult. That is not at all what the bible teaches.

After they ate of the forbidden fruit, they were cursed with sorrow and hard-labor – not with death. [Genesis 3:16-20] God prevented them from BECOMING IMMORTAL by immediately banishing them from the Garden and blocking them from eating of the Tree of Life.

And Cain could not curse the generations before the flood. There’s not collective punishment.

[Deuteronomy 24:16, Ezekiel 18, Jeremiah 31:29].

If you consider the whole of Christianity a cult, you may be right. However to us, it sounds like you are the one who is holding a cult belief.

Who said that a man cannot die for the sins of another. Jesus did, and He was fully man AND fully God.

Romans 5:12-19. God gave mankind the first commandment in the garden of Eden he said “of the tree of the knowledge of both good and evil THOU SHALT NOT EAT of it, for in the day that thou eat thereof THOU SHALT SURELY DIE.

Notice this was the first commandment God gave to mankind it was the Law of Sin and Death given to mankind right at the start the very first Thou Shalt Not in the bible and the consequence of not obeying that law was DEATH (the law of sin and death). OK in Romans 5:12 Paul says the blame squarely with Adam for sin and death entering the world.

and death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.

But the last part of that verse “and death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned”. Has been interpreted as meaning that death passed to all men because of their personal sins.

When Adam sinned he broke Gods commandment that had been given to him personally from God, apart from Eve nobody else broke that specific commandment. And the law of God had not yet been given to men and so where their is no law sin is not imputed (charged against people) if sin is not charged against people it is not their sin causing their deaths.

When Adam and Eve sowed into their bodies that which was forbidden they became corrupted with forbidden knowledge and as a result of that corruption God banned them from the only source of eternal life that existed on the Earth the tree of Life having been banned from the tree of life it would that they would eventually die.

Cain and Able had no access to the tree of life so they would die to, and so it is with the rest of mankind they to were cut off from the tree of life and so die.

So we see again why in Romans 5:12 Paul lays the blame for sin and death entering the world at the feet of Adam, Eve was not the seed carrier so she is not held responsible for sin and death entering the world as she has no seed with which to propagate it further.

Romans 5:12 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.

(Jesus Christ) 15, But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one “Adam” many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

Again notice the judgement was by one “Adam” to condemnation, what was the condemnation. it was death by what Adam did.

much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) Again notice that its the one mans offence Adams that has caused death to be reigning over everyone else. But much more those who receive an abundance of grace and the “gift of righteousness” shall reign in life “eternal life” by one Christ Jesus.

even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life”. Its was Adams one offence of breaking God command that caused judgement to come upon “all men” and in the same way the righteousness of one man Jesus Christ has caused the free gift of justification “righteousness” to come upon all men that entitles them to eternal life “if they receive him as their saviour” from their corrupt sinful condition.

Why does God do this for mankind. 19, For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

1 Corinthians 15:22 As in Adam all die (that’s us we were all in Adam) even so in Christ shall be made alive. The Judgement upon men is that they were in Adam when Adam sinned and were corrupted with a sin nature and were sinners from birth and so sin.

As will those who are not born again as Jesus said was required to even see the kingdom of God. A mas sinful corrupted spirit must be born again regenerated by the Holy Spirit of God we must be born again by incorruptible seed the second time.

We are vacuum packed and all the goodness is sealed in. Our flesh is not born gain “the flesh profits nothing” it is the spirit that is quickened “made alive”.

Grace and Peace in Jesus name Alan any comments are welcome. Interesting how Adam preferred Abel’s offering of meat, (with Abel been the cattle farmer) over Cain’s offering of crops.

The definitive answer is found in the Book of Jubilees, which from a frequency standpoint in Dead Sea Scroll discoveries was sixth behind Psalms, Deuteronomy, 1 Enoch, Genesis, and Isaiah. See Note that the Fall occurs BEFORE Cain killed Abel.

.and satanic spiritual infusion.when God asked about able Cain lyed and then there was the murder of able.these two sprits are from Satan.he was a lyer and a murder from the beginning. Were did Cain get this.

Now it’s everywhere.like a plague. and there’s the order from God not to harm Cain and obvious killer.

I agree by two or three things a thing is confirmed. A pattern of communication and confirmation.

like a type of crystal growing keeps to the same construct. the beginning and the end …the aleph and the tal…the fire by night and the cloud by day…Adam and Eve… The silver and the gold in the temple… The water and the blood out of his side.faith that works by sacrificial love.

God in our speech.logos.the two pillers in front of the temple one named Boaz the other cloud.all the pathways of God truth and mercy. to believe with the heart and speak with the mouth.the Yom the I’m…cloud by day and fire by night.

Image: Shutterstock. Stories are a great way for you to enrich your child’s imagination, expand their view of the world, and teach them some valuable lessons.

Stories are a great way to teach children the difference between right and wrong and instill goodness in them. Stories with morals help raise well-rounded children.

Read this post and see your child reach an imaginative world. Image: IStock.

All that existed was a smoking ball darker than midnight. Seeing this, God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.” God named the light as ‘day’ and the darkness as ‘night.’ And there was evening, and there was morning.

Then, God thought that there should be something to separate water from water, so God created the sky. The second day.

God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” All the water in the world came together and formed the great ocean, and the dry land rose from it. God named this dry land ‘Earth’ and the water ‘Sea.’.

So, God created grass, trees, flowers, and fruits. The third day.

So, he made the sun come out during the day, and the stars and moon to shine at night. The earth looked beautiful, with so many elements present.

The fifth day. On the sixth day, God created all kinds of animals.

With everything else in place, there was still something missing. The world was ready for humankind.

So, the first man, Adam, was created. On the seventh day, God took rest.

God gave Adam a home, the Garden of Eden. His home thrived with lush gardens, blooming flowers, cascading rivers, friendly animals, chirping birds, and every wonderful thing you can imagine.

Adam was to care for this land and live by eating the fruits from the trees. He could do anything he wanted — swim in the river, climb trees, jump over bushes, ride on horses, and eat fruits.

The only thing that he was disallowed to do was eat the fruit from a large tree at the center of the garden. Adam promised God that he would never eat the fruit and continued with his daily activities.

As days passed in the beautiful garden, Adam started to get lonely. To give him company, God created a woman.

Adam and Eve lived happily in this beautiful garden they called home. Every day, they did just as God told them to do.

One day, when they were walking in the garden, they came near the forbidden tree. There was a beautiful apple hanging on the forbidden tree.

” Adam remembered what God had told them and refused to eat the fruit. The evil snake then said, “There is nothing to worry about.

While Adam didn’t believe the snake, Eve did. She plucked the apple from the tree and took a bite of the juicy fruit.

Suddenly, they realized that they were not wearing any clothes and immediately covered their body parts with leaves. Next, Adam and Eve realized that they disobeyed God and have committed a great sin.

They were afraid of God and tried to hide amidst the trees. When God appeared and called out to Adam, Adam said, “Lord, I heard your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, and I hid.”.

So, you shall suffer. You shall endure pain and trouble every single day of your life.” As to Adam, God said, “As you listened to what Eve said, you must suffer too.

They were then banished from the beautiful garden. God then left, leaving a flaming sword to ensure nobody ever touches the forbidden tree again.

The story of Adam and Eve reminds us to make wise choices and consider the consequences of our actions. They were given a beautiful garden to live in, but they were also given one rule: not to eat from a certain tree.

Their disobedience resulted in the sacrifice of their harmonious life in the garden. Adam and Eve’s pride in wanting to be like God led them astray.

The moral of the story is that we should listen to those who care for us, follow the rules set for our well-being, and resist the temptation to do wrong things. 1.

Adam only had one wife named Eve — the mother of all human beings. 2.

According to the Bible in John 3:13, no one has gone to heaven yet except Jesus Christ. Everyone who died is waiting for judgment day to come.

When did God create Eve.

What does the story of Adam and Eve symbolize.

The story of Adam and Eve offers an important prelude to the various stories narrated in the Bible. The story explains God’s creation of the earth and how Adam and Eve were created as caretakers of all the God’s creations.

Since young children may find it challenging to understand this story, we have simplified the story of Adam and Eve for kids to help them easily grasp it. Read this story to your child as a part of their bedtime routine to introduce them to various stories in the Bible.

Watch as they discover more about the world through this Bible story.

It’s always important to remember that if you’re reading the Bible in English, you’re reading a translation. This becomes especially vital when you learn things like Eve was created from one of Adam’s ribs because that’s not what the original Hebrew word means.

It usually refers to the side of something, or “limbs lateral to the vertical axis of an erect human body.” So if Eve was really just made from some vague side area of Adam, this leaves a lot of interpretation. Enter the dong bone theory.

Since the penis bone is extremely common in mammals (even other primates have one) but humans males are missing this piece of kit, Dr. Ziony Zevit thinks Genesis holds the answer.

Men have an even number of ribs but are missing the baculum. So it stands to reason, he says, that’s the real bone God formed Eve from.

The Times of Israel reported that many readers were incensed at the idea. One accused Zevit of trying to “damage [her] faith” and cause her to doubt the Bible.

Christians are familiar with Genesis 3 when humanity first sinned. Adam and Eve get tempted by Satan in the garden of Eden and succumb to the effects of evil and sin.

Adam and Eve eat from the tree and sin. Many will argue that they even sinned prior to eating the fruit when Eve doesn’t give a totally true statement (saying that even if they touch the fruit they’ll die, even though God explicitly stated eat) and Adam stands idly by and passively allows his wife to partake of the fruit.

He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever” (Genesis 3:22). But did this evil exist before this moment.

Many of us will point at Satan and say that evil existed with him long before Adam and Eve sinned, but do we have Scripture to back this up.

We’ll dive into these questions and more in this article. To answer this question, we have to dig into a few Old Testament passages to uncover the first sin.

Let’s analyze the following passages. How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn.

You said in your heart, “I will ascend to the heavens. I will raise my throne above the stars of God.

This passage refers to Satan. Some versions of the Bible explicitly say his name instead of “morning star.” We can see, from these verses, that Satan’s pride led to his downfall.

Ezekiel 28 describes Satan as a cherub, who used to live in heaven until: “You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you.”. From here Satan is cast out of heaven to earth, where he tempts Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden,.

And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling — these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day (Jude 6). Therefore, evil existed before humanity sinned.

This Focus on the Family article warns against thinking of evil as a noun or thing. According to the article, “Biblically speaking, evil is an aspect of relationship.”.

Meaning, this includes angels. When God created heaven and the angels, beings who worshipped him, this allowed for the possibility of the angels choosing not to worship God — to instead, worship themselves.

The Bible doesn’t give us a timeline of when God created the angels and heaven, but we do know he created all things. In short, scholars have fiercely debated about the origin of evil, and this article will not be able to flesh out a direct answer to the question.

Why does it matter that we should know evil started before the creation of the world.

The first sin ever committed appears to be pride. Scripture makes it clear that pride goeth before a fall.

Secondly, it matters because evil shows the existence of God’s love. God allows us to have free will and to use that free will to have a relationship with him.

Photo Credit: ©iStock/Getty Images Plus/AlessandroPhoto. Hope Bolinger is an acquisitions editor at End Game Press, and the author of almost 30 books.

Check out her books at hopebolinger.com for clean books in most genres, great for adults and kids. LISTEN: A Prayer for Loved Ones Who Don’t Know Jesus.

WATCH: A Prayer to Be Bold for the Gospel.

Stock footage courtesy of soundstripe.com.

In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth, and in seeing all that He created, it was in His heart to create mankind. God first created man, whom He made from the dust of the ground.

His name means, “red” or “to make” for he was made from the ground to walk the earth. Shortly after making Adam, God’s heart, full of wisdom and understanding, saw that it was not good for man to be alone (Genesis 2:18).

During this holy slumber, God took a rib from Adam, and from that rib crafted the perfect counterpart to Adam, naming her Eve. Eve’s name means “to breathe” or “to give life” for through her many children would be given life.

This resulted in Adam and Eve no longer living in the Garden and being led to live out their days on the earth, raising many children. Cain and Abel: The first son of Adam and Eve was named Cain, his name in Hebrew means, “acquired” for Eve remarks after his birth in Genesis 4:1, “With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man.” After Cain came another son, Abel.

The Bible shares in the course of time that the two boys grew into men, Cain working the soil and Abel working with the animals. Both came before the Lord with offerings, but what Abel brought to the Lord was deemed acceptable.

This jealously boiled to the top with rage and Cain took the life of his brother, Abel. Genesis 4:10 explains the reaction and punishment given from the Lord to Cain for the murder,.

Listen. Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground.

When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.”.

He had many children himself, but the reminder of his sin against God and his brother would mark his life and generations to come. The children of Cain were city builders, constructing the city of Enoch.

Many forged tools of bronze and iron, and through Cain’s line many advancements came about. This is proof that despite sins of the past or failures, there can still be success and goodness in the future.

How Was Seth Different. After the murder of Abel and banishment of Cain, a new hope was granted to Adam and Eve through another child, Seth.

Names hold deeper meaning and significance, often shedding light on a person’s destiny or potential. This is why so often in the Bible names would be changed over time, to reflect the work of the Lord or the promise.

The Bible shares in Genesis 5 that Seth looked much like his father, Adam. He lived 912 years and had many sons and daughters.

Seth’s line was anointed and blessed for through his line, mankind would be spared. Does the Bible Say Anything about Their Other Children.

When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image. and he named him Seth.

Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died. Because there were so few people, the longevity of mankind was far longer than it is today.

Should Christians Really Give Up All Their Possessions.

Although not much else is known of these other children, we do know they served a great purpose in populating the earth. The genealogical accounts of three of Adam and Eve’s sons provide more of a glimpse of the timelines and outcomes of their descendants.

The question and alarm of incest arises, but as Bible.org explains,. As to incest, it was not considered a sin and was not prohibited for Adam and early man.

1:28, there is little doubt that Adam’s sons and daughters had to have married their own sisters and brothers if the race was to populate the earth, but due to the purity of the race as evidenced also by the long length of life, there were no adverse effects as we see happening today. Gradually, as the effects of sin took its toll on the human race, marrying one’s own sister, etc., began to create hereditary problems.

Adam and Eve’s descendants did marry brother and sister, but the consequence and sin that we think of in modern terms did not exist in early mankind. It is clear through studying genealogy as well that God would continue to purify the line in choosing Seth’s line, not Cain’s, to spare mankind after the flood through Noah.

Christians can learn much from Adam and Eve’s children. It is clear through the story of Cain and Abel that we must be mindful not to let sin control us.

Instead, we should look at the plank in our own eyes, rather than the specks in our brother’s eye (Matthew 7:3). Working on what we can control, our own actions will prove better than causing pain to others.

The fruit of our lives can be harvested by walking in obedience and step with the Spirit of God and the fruit of the spirit of self-control. (Galatians 5:22).

The Lord blessed Adam and Eve with a new son, Seth, after the murder of their son, Abel. The Bible tells us that Seth looked much like his father, Adam, which brings forth the curiosity that perhaps Seth was the renewed hope for this couple of a fresh start after much tragedy.

This cannot be coincidental that it was through this new son given that it was his line spared, one not marked by such darkness as Cain’s. We serve a great Lord of second chances, and Seth’s line proved a second chance for Adam and Eve as parents and for their lineage.

We are all connected, we are all family in flesh because of them. Their children are our ancestors, and we can learn much from those who came before us.

The sins first committed by the original man and woman themselves, Adam and Eve. The hope of the human condition is a forgiving and loving Father Who earnestly seeks relationship with His creation, since the dawn of man and ever still today.

Cally Logan is an author and US History teacher from Richmond, Virginia. In her free time, she enjoys mentoring youth and spending time in nature.

and Dear Future Husband: A Love Letter Journey While Waiting for God’s Best. Check her out on Instagram and Twitter, @CallyLogan and TikTok Cally_Logan.

LISTEN: New Year, New Creation.

WATCH: 5 Verses on Strength for When You Feel Weak.

Lilith (/ˈlɪlɪθ/. Hebrew: לִילִית, romanized: Liliṯ), also spelt Lilit, Lilitu, or Lilis, is a female figure in Mesopotamian and Jewish mythology, theorized to be the first wife of Adam and supposedly the primordial she-demon.

She is thought to be mentioned in Biblical Hebrew in the Book of Isaiah, and in late antiquity in Mandaean and Jewish sources from 500 CE onward. Lilith appears in historiolas (incantations incorporating a short mythic story) in various concepts and localities that give partial descriptions of her.

Many rabbinic authorities, including Maimonides and Menachem Meiri, reject the existence of Lilith.

The Akkadian word lilû is related to the Hebrew word lilit appearing in Isaiah 34:14, which is thought to be a night bird by some modern scholars such as Judit M. Blair.

Many have also connected her to the Mesopotamian demon Lamashtu, who shares similar traits and a similar position in mythology to Lilith.

In some Jewish folklore, such as the Alphabet of Sirach (c. 700–1000 AD), Lilith appears as Adam’s first wife, who was created at the same time and from the same clay as Adam.[a] The legend of Lilith developed extensively during the Middle Ages, in the tradition of Aggadah, the Zohar, and Jewish mysticism.

Interpretations of Lilith found in later Jewish materials are plentiful, but little information has survived relating to the Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian views of this class of demons. Recent scholarship has disputed the relevance of two sources previously used to connect the Jewish lilith to an Akkadian lilītu – the Gilgamesh appendix and the Arslan Tash amulets (see below for discussion of these two problematic sources).

In contrast, some scholars, such as Lowell K. Handy, hold the view that though Lilith derives from Mesopotamian demonology, evidence of the Hebrew Lilith being present in the sources frequently cited – the Sumerian Gilgamesh fragment and the Sumerian incantation from Arshlan-Tash being two – is scant, if present at all.

In Hebrew-language texts, the term lilith or lilit (translated as “night creatures”, “night monster”, “night hag”, or “screech owl”) first occurs in a list of animals in Isaiah 34. The Isaiah 34:14 Lilith reference does not appear in most common Bible translations such as KJV and NIV.

Jewish incantation bowls and amulets from Mesopotamia from the first to the eighth centuries identify Lilith as a female demon and provide the first visual depictions of her.

Some uses of līlītu are listed in the Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (CAD, 1956, L.190), in Wolfram von Soden’s Akkadisches Handwörterbuch (AHw, p. 553), and Reallexikon der Assyriologie (RLA, p.

The Sumerian female demons lili have no etymological relation to Akkadian lilu, “evening”.

Charles Fossey (1902) has this literally translating to “female night being/demon”, although cuneiform inscriptions from Mesopotamia exist where Līlīt and Līlītu refers to disease-bearing wind spirits.

600 BC. Tablet XII is not part of the Epic of Gilgamesh, but is a later Assyrian Akkadian translation of the latter part of the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh.

After ten years of growth, she comes to harvest it and finds a serpent living at its base, a Zu bird raising young in its crown, and that a ki-sikil-lil-la-ke made a house in its trunk. Gilgamesh is said to have killed the snake, and then the zu bird flew away to the mountains with its young, while the ki-sikil-lil-la-ke fearfully destroys its house and runs for the forest.

According to a new source[which. ] from late antiquity, Lilith appears in a Mandaean magic story where she is considered to represent the branches of a tree with other demonic figures that form other parts of the tree, though this may also include multiple “Liliths”.

Suggested translations for the Tablet XII spirit in the tree include ki-sikil as “sacred place”, lil as “spirit”, and lil-la-ke as “water spirit”, but also simply “owl”, given that the lil is building a home in the trunk of the tree.

Kramer’s translation of the Gilgamesh fragment was used by Henri Frankfort (1937) and Emil Kraeling (1937) to support identification of a woman with wings and bird-feet in the disputed Burney Relief as related to Lilith. Frankfort and Kraeling identified the figure in the relief with Lilith.

Modern research has identified the figure as one of the main goddesses of the Mesopotamian pantheons, most probably Ereshkigal. But the figure is more generally identified as the goddess of love and war: Thorkild Jacobsen identified the figure as Inanna in an analysis based on the existence of symbols and attributes commonly recognized to the goddess and on textual evidence.

The Arslan Tash amulets are limestone plaques discovered in 1933 at Arslan Tash, the authenticity of which is disputed. William F.

Gaster, and others, accepted the amulets as a pre-Jewish source which shows that the name Lilith already existed in the 7th century BC but Torczyner (1947) identified the amulets as a later Jewish source.

Most other nouns in the list appear more than once and thus are better documented, with the exception of another hapax legomenon: the word qippoz. The reading of scholars and translators is often guided by a decision about the complete list of eight creatures as a whole.

(12) Her nobles shall be no more, nor shall kings be proclaimed there. all her princes are gone.

She shall become an abode for jackals and a haunt for ostriches. (14) Wildcats shall meet with desert beasts, satyrs shall call to one another.

(15) There the hoot owl shall nest and lay eggs, hatch them out and gather them in her shadow. There shall the kites assemble, none shall be missing its mate.

(17) It is He who casts the lot for them, and with His hands He marks off their shares of her. They shall possess her forever, and dwell there from generation to generation.

Hebrew: ,וּפָגְשׁוּ צִיִּים אֶת-אִיִּים, וְשָׂעִיר עַל-רֵעֵהוּ יִקְרָא. אַךְ-שָׁם הִרְגִּיעָה לִּילִית, וּמָצְאָה לָהּ מָנוֹח.

ʾaḵ-šam hirgiʿā liliṯ, umāṣʾā lāh mānoḥ. 34:14 “And shall-meet wildcats with jackals the goat he-calls his- fellow lilit (lilith) she-rests and she-finds rest[d] 34:15 there she-shall-nest the great-owl, and she-lays-(eggs), and she-hatches, and she-gathers under her-shadow: hawks [kites, gledes] also they-gather, every one with its mate.

In the Dead Sea Scrolls, among the 19 fragments of Isaiah found at Qumran, the Great Isaiah Scroll (1Q1Isa) in 34:14 renders the creature as plural liliyyot (or liliyyoth).

Schrader’s and Levy’s view is therefore partly dependent on a later dating of Deutero-Isaiah to the 6th century BC and the presence of Jews in Baghdad in the Neo-Babylonian Empire, which would coincide with the possible references to the Lilītu in Babylonian demonology. However, this view is challenged by some modern researchers, such as Judit M.

Another interpretation of these passages is that the consequence of sin is spiritual death, not physical death.

The text of Genesis 2–3 can support an interpretation of the curse as spiritual death. In the curse of Genesis 3:19, God tells Adam “for dust you are and to dust you will return,” implying that Adam was created mortal from the dust.

What did happen on the day they ate from the tree. Adam and Eve felt shame and were expelled from the Garden, breaking their fellowship with God–spiritual death.

This is a popular idea, but not clear in the Biblical text. The first humans are described as “very good” and pleasing to God (Gen.

Also, consider the Tree of Life. God planted this tree in the garden before the fall (Gen.

3:22). If God created humans as immortal, what was the purpose of the Tree of Life.

In the New Testament, Paul writes much on the relationship between sin and death. Sometimes Paul was clearly referring to spiritual death (Rom.

15:35–42). Yet even in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul writes of the eternal life in Christ as something much more than the mere earthly life we experience now, implying that “death” also refers to much more than mere physical death.

the new spiritual life provided by Jesus’ victory. The Garden of Eden has a reputation as a perfect place, with no death, pain, or even danger for humans or animals.

Spanner points out that God charged humanity to “subdue” (Gen. 1:28), a word that implies danger.7 Also, Genesis 2 places Adam and Eve in a garden.

The Bible is clear that the culmination of God’s plan in the new creation is a place without tears, pain, or death (Rev. 21:4), but is less clear whether the first creation shared these traits.

Written By Leslie Koh. After spending a number of years in the media, Leslie finally decided to move from working with bad news to good news.

He works as an editor in Our Daily Bread Ministries.

Twice, I wrote a few paragraphs, only to remove them after finding that they were going nowhere. Despite having spent a couple of hours coming up with the first two versions, it wasn’t really difficult to click on “delete”.

Which makes me wonder, why didn’t God do the same thing with creation. When God created the heavens, the earth and everything else, it was all perfect.

Then everything went wrong (thanks, Adam and Eve), and here we are, living in a far-from-perfect world that is pretty much destined for destruction. Now we know God is omniscient ie.

That means He would surely have known that Adam and Eve would, at some point, decide to disobey Him. He would have known that this sin would condemn not just the duo, but succeeding generations of mankind, along with the earth.

After all, another six days’ work wouldn’t have been too difficult, would it. Of course, you could argue that knowing man, Creation 2.0 would probably have gone down the same route, anyway.

Why did God create this world if He knew it was going to go wrong eventually.

it’s probably one of the most-often asked questions among Christians. And I’m not going to give the impression that it led me to study the Bible carefully and come up with biblically, logically and theologically sound explanations.

I also wasn’t looking for a watertight answer that even the staunchest atheist or strongest cynic couldn’t refute. (So, yes, please feel free to disagree.) No, I was just looking for some possible answers—a new perspective, if you will, on the question.

Before going into why God decided to proceed with Creation, however, I figured that it would help to narrow the scope of the discussion by considering (and dismissing) several alternative options to explain what happened. As a believer, I kept to the basic assumption that God is good and that He is perfect.

One, God made creation perfect, but somehow it went wrong, and He had to get His Son to do a quick rescue job. On the surface, this might seem plausible.

you can even imagine Him nodding satisfactorily at the end of each of the first six days, saying, “That’s good”, then sighing sadly days later when Adam and Eve take those fatal bites into the forbidden fruit. But to say that creation didn’t quite turn out as expected suggests that God had lost control of His product.

If God wasn’t in full control.

then everything I believe would come apart. Next.

Two, God made creation such that this would happen, so He could send His Son to earth to show His glory. This idea might seem to fit in with why God made creation (“The heavens declare the glory of God.

It suggests that like a director of a dramatic movie, God somehow arranged it all such that man would sin, and He would send His Son down to show His mercy and love. Except that.

this would be tantamount to saying that God created sin. that He made everything good, then deliberately arranged for things to fall apart, just so that He could show His mercy and grace.

The Bible, however, makes it clear that God is good (Psalm 107:1, 1 Timothy 4:4, James 1:17), so let’s dismiss this option too.

This third option keeps to the assumption that God is good and perfect. it’s like having a good parent who raises a child perfectly, only to see this child become a rebel.

You could have endless discussions (and arguments) over this, and it would be hard to come to a definitive conclusion that would be acceptable to most. But a little reading threw up the following three points which I felt appealed to my sense of logic and reasonable-ness, and most importantly, were also consistent with what we know about God.

I saw them more as perspectives that helped me address the question. You be the judge.

This sounds a bit like option 2 above, but with one difference: God didn’t make the Fall of Man happen (because that would suggest He made man sin), though He knew it would. But He allowed to happen so that we could see His glory and experience His grace and mercy.

“With all wisdom and understanding, he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ” (Ephesians 1:8-10).

Through His judgment of sin, we see His justice and holiness. And through Christ’s redeeming work on the cross, we see the Father’s love, mercy, and grace.

Of course, that might beg the questions: Could God’s glory have been manifested if He had not allowed the world to rebel against Him. Couldn’t He have been glorified in another way.

Well, I believe this question is too hypothetical to come up with a satisfactory answer. We could become indignant and demand to know why God didn’t show His glory another way.

it was Adam and Eve who chose to disobey God themselves. And because of it, and what happened later, we got to see and understand God’s holiness and justice, and experience His love and grace.

If you think about it, God really didn’t have to create the world—or us. As a self-sufficient and complete God, He doesn’t need a world to support Him, nor anyone to keep Him in power.

the Holy Trinity is, after all, made up of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Yet God made man because He wanted to have a relationship with us.

How is man different. We are created “in his own image” (Genesis 1:27) ie.

That enables us to relate to Him in a way that other creations can’t. God doesn’t need us to keep Him company, but He wants to enjoy our company.

Why did God create the world even though He knew it would go south. Because He desired a loving relationship with man, and was ready to be patient, forgiving, and merciful when man failed.

They already have each other for company, but they desire the companionship of an addition to the family. And even though they know that this child will be naughty, flawed, and rebellious, the hope of the joy that this child brings is worth the heartbreak and the pain.

Why did He give them the choice.

Why does a couple choose to have a child and not a robot. Easy—the robot won’t love back.

Love cannot be forced or controlled. otherwise it’s no better than slavery or forced loyalty.

Because the son had, of his own accord, chosen to repent and to return to his father. The latter had not forced nor bribed his son to come back.

That’s why God calls us His children, and not His servants. If He had made man such that we had no choice but to obey Him, our “love” and “loyalty” would not mean much to Him.

So He made us with a free will, the ability to choose whether to follow His instructions or not. That may also explain why God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17) in the Garden of.

God is not a Concept. […] College) and formerly the senior editor at the Biblical Archaeology Society wrote the post Who Are the Nephilim.

[…] The Nephilim is another term for fallen angels. The Sons of God is also a reference to the Nephilim.

The Nephilim too were another creation by God despite their attempt at unseating God in Heaven during their mutiny. This also indicates that there were extraterrestrial beings on the planet in those days (Extraterrestrial meaning -not from around here-all angels by the way are extra-terrestrial beings).

I failed to post WHY the Nephilim mated with the daughters of Adam, specifically. It was Satan’s attempt to corrupt the seedline of the coming Christ.

His first attempt was in the Garden. The Serpent/tree of knowledge of good and evil were/are Satan.

Adam and Eve covered/hid the part of their bodies that they sinned with. Cain was NOT Adam’s son.

Thanks. The Nephilim were/are the Son’s of God that mated with the daughters of Adam, specifically the daughters of the man Adam.

Noah’s flood for the purpose of wiping the Gibbor/Giants off the earth. Noah’s flood was regional, not worldwide.

God used Israel and other Armies to wipe them out. Goliath was one of them.

Anak is just one of the tribes.

The antichrist appears BEFORE Christ returns. 2 Thessalonians chapter 2.

In addition, there have been found in that locality, a rhinocerous skull dug from the area as well as fossilized palm leaves. Wow.

[…] Who Are the Nephilim. […].

and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto […]. You need to read The book of Enoch which clearly describes that the sons of God who made it with the daughters of men and produced the race of giants AKA nephilim… Were rapacious, cannibalistic, violent, and committed every kind of atrocity.

Even the native Americans. That is why God had to cleanse the world with the universal deluge because they had turned it into a hell on Earth.

[…] Genesi 6:1–4 dice ai lettori che i Nephilim, che significa “caduti” quando tradotto in inglese, erano il prodotto della copulazione tra gli esseri divini (lett. figli di Dio) e le donne umane (lett.

I Nephilim sono conosciuti come grandi guerrieri e giganti biblici (vedere Ezechiele 32:27 e Numeri 13:33). (fonte) […].

NOTICE. nowhere in the Bible do You ever see the giants being on the side of GOD’s people.

That should reveal something of their origin. It tells us nothing of their origin except that they fought against God’s people.

I will quickly explain what I think is the origin of the Anakim for example, they were sons and descendants of King Anak and were described as tall and powerful enemies of the Israelites. The Anakim are also described as wearing long jewelry around their necks.

King Arba is the son of Japhia King of Lachish and Gezer. Japhia was also known as Horam.

The Anakim were also believed to be the direct descendants of the Nephilim who are very mysterious beings or people who are described as being very large and strong and they lived both before and after the Flood. King Arba is mentioned in the Book of Joshua.

The Anakites which in Hebrew is “Anakim” are described in the Hebrew Bible as giants. The Rephaim we’re going to assume is referring to a strong, tall race of people who lived in the land of Canaan.

The Emim and Rephaim were one and the same people with different names. They were also called “Rephaites” or “Repha’im”.

Goliath and his brothers Madon, Lahmi, Saph or “Sippai” and Ishbi-Benob were also called the last of the Rephaim. Goliath’s father is a Rephaite of tall stature as were many descendants of the Rephaim and the mother is Orpah also called Princess Harafu sister of Ruth and daughter of Eglon King of the Moabites who were a tribe directly descended from Moab, son of Lot.

As you can tell Og and his brother Sihon are called Amorites so they must directly descend from Emer later known as “Amor” the son of Canaan and Canaan is the son of Ham and Ham is the son of Noah. Even Gilgamesh who is Sumerian and Hammurabi who is Babylonian are called Amorites and are direct descendants of Noah through his grandson Emer.

Orpah’s direct descendants are known to have battled with King Davids men and the tall statured humans that battled David and his soldiers were Goliath and his siblings. Chilion’s mother Naomi later called “Mara” was obviously angry at Orpah for having a relationship with another man while being married to her son.

Zuzim or Zuzites were a tribe who lived in the land of Ham, which was located east of the Jordan River between Bashan and Moab. The Zuzim probably a shortened name of the Zamzummim.

Heth ancestor of the Hittites was the brother of Emer ancestor of the Amorites. If you remember that Esau married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite and Basemath daughter of Elon the Hittite.

This is just a sample of the information that is available if one just takes the time to research the Table of Nations and world history. That was the most thorough response I’ve ever read on this topic…you completely dismantled the ridiculous notion of angles having the ability to procreate.

Also the Watchers are eternal and bound to the earthly realm as punishment. I think they have been working to deceive God’s people, throughout history showing up as powerful god like beings I.e Zeus, Thor, the nine and now as alien beings who have been guiding humanity for thousands of years.

To be clear I believe in an almost infinite universe there may well be life on other planets. This is actually just a reprint of Whie’s 2016 article and I wrote a review of it back then: From the very first paragraph there are various errors in this article.

Thank you Ken. I agree with you.

I disagree that Genesis 6:4 is “praise” of nephilim. It states that they were powerful and famous.

I agree. In a study, I ended up on this page.

Nothing But Praise For The Nephilim.

Are you serious. Did the writer no look into the context.

There is no understanding of the meaning of 2 Timothy 2:15. As a result many well meaning Christians seeking truth and understanding of God’s word are lead down a path of confusion.

non-denominational bump. Couldn’t agree more.

She obviously didn’t read the book of Joshua and certainly did not read The book of Enoch. They were super predators… rapacious, murderous ,cannibalistic… and so overpopulated the world thus creatin.

Adam and Eve have a long history of being scoffed at by skeptics. Almost from the beginning, opponents of Christianity have dismissed the opening chapters of Genesis – including the story of our first parents – as pure myth, on par with other creation myths from the Ancient Near East.

In recent times, even believers in growing numbers have come to question the historicity of the first human couple. They’ll insist Adam and Eve weren’t real people, just metaphorical stand-ins for humanity.

These efforts can stem from an earnest desire to resolve an alleged conflict between science and Scripture. Or else, they may be an attempt to avoid looking ignorant in the eyes of secular culture.

When approaching a text, especially one as significant as the creation account, it’s vital to get the genre right. Genesis is not a modern textbook of history or science.

However, that first chapter isn’t Hebrew poetry per se, any more than the rest of the book is. There’s none of the two-line parallelism that’s a defining feature of Hebrew verse found in Psalms and elsewhere in Scripture.

As apologist Alisa Childers points out, “Although the story is told in a poetic way, the Genesis account mainly exhibits the characteristics of narrative prose, which describes a series of events.”. To be sure, the proper name “Adam” is also a general term for humankind, as “Eve” is for “life” and “Eden” is for “pleasure” or “delight.” Nevertheless, the text presents Adam and Eve as actual people in a specific place and time.

Moreover, Adam’s genealogical record lists his exact age when his son Seth was born, the fact that he had other sons and daughters, and the exact age when he died. In fact, the entire book of Genesis is built around a series of genealogies that connect Adam to Noah, and then to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and ultimately to Moses and the people of Israel.

The first chapter of Genesis states that God created humanity, male and female, in his own image. The second chapter provides more detail, describing how God formed Adam directly from the dust of the earth and breathed life into him.

It’s difficult to square an honest reading of this narrative with the idea that Adam and Eve were metaphorical, or else a pair of hominids elevated to human status. The text says that when God breathed life into Adam, the man became a nephesh chaya, Hebrew for living creature.

So, if Adam were a divinely mutated hominid, he would have already been a nephesh chaya before God ever breathed life into him. Beyond that, the story of Adam and Eve is essential to a proper understanding of the nature of humanity.

And because all people are descended from that first couple, every individual, male and female, has an equal share of that value and dignity. If Adam and Eve were pre-existing hominids transformed by God, then humanity’s unique reflection of the Imago Dei is blurred at best and may not even be present to the same degree – or at all – in every individual.

Adam and Eve are mentioned only sporadically in the rest of Scripture after Genesis. But when they are, they’re always presented as actual historical figures.

In similar fashion, the Gospel of Luke traces the ancestry of Jesus all the way back to Adam. In the book of Acts, Paul tells the skeptical Athenians that God made all human nations from one original man.

Jesus himself, while teaching about marriage and divorce in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, alludes to Adam and Eve as real people. Later, as recorded in Matthew and Luke, the Lord also speaks about the literal murder of Abel, Adam and Eve’s second son.

It would be hard to deny that the authors of Scripture – and the Lord himself – read the Genesis account as historical narrative and viewed Adam and Eve as historical people. But that hasn’t stopped critics from trying.

Or else they’ll claim that the apostles and evangelists – and even Jesus – were simply wrong. Such claims, however, don’t bear up under serious scrutiny.

In each case, the spiritual truth they were trying to convey falls apart unless rooted in historical fact. It’s hard to imagine a rigorous thinker like Paul or a careful historian like Luke getting their facts wrong and using myths to make their case.

From a Gospel perspective, the most significant discussion about Adam and Eve outside of Genesis is found in Paul’s letters to the Roman and Corinthian churches. In the fifth chapter of Romans, Paul presents Adam and Jesus as the two representative heads of humanity.

But through Jesus, who took on human nature, Adam’s fallen descendants can receive grace, righteousness and eternal life. The Apostle reiterates and distills this core Gospel truth to the church at Corinth via a series of vivid contrasts: “For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.

Thus it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being’. the last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven” (1 Corinthians 15:22, 45, 49). There can be no doubt that Paul understood Adam to be just as real as Jesus.

There’s no fall of humanity, no original sin, and no need or possibility of redemption. Tim Keller addresses the inconsistent idea that Paul’s argument holds up even if he got his facts wrong: “[Paul] most definitely wanted to teach us that Adam and Eve were real historical figures.

If Adam doesn’t exist, Paul’s whole argument – that both sin and grace work ‘covenantally’ – falls apart. You can’t say that ‘Paul was a man of his time’ but we can accept his basic teaching about Adam.

Old Testament scholar Richard Belcher adds: “If all human beings are not descended from Adam, there is no hope of salvation for them. Christ does not and cannot redeem what he has not assumed.

If there is no redemptive history that is credible, then redemptive history is lost in any meaningful sense. Thus the historicity of Adam has implications for the Gospel.”.

What Scripture affirms about creation, especially the origin of humanity, is central to its teaching about salvation.”.

Naturally none of this has deterred skeptics (and sadly many believers) from assuming that “settled science” has ruled out the possibility of Adam and Eve ever existing, never mind being the progenitors of the entire human race. But science – which at its heart is about discovery and not consensus – has done nothing of the sort.