Adam of Gen1 is the same Adam of Gen 2

Faith & Science Conversation
1

Greetings, I’m new to the forum, this is my first post. The diversity of opinions and the differing conclusions on information presented on this forum, reinforces in me that we need to know the Father and Jesus his son, for that is eternal life.

My topic is the first Adam. I know he has been discussed many times and being new to the forum I wasn’t sure if I should comment on an old post or start a new one, so forgive me if I took the incorrect path. I’ll will be using adam to mean mankind and Adam as the name of the first man. I have read on the forum that some think there were two adams, the adam (man) in Genesis 1 and the Adam (Name of a the first man) in Genesis 2. If I have understood properly there are those who also believe that there was no real Adam created, God just picked some evolutionized beast and breathed into him something special and that became Adam. And there are other opinions also I’m sure. The point I want to bring up is this; God first declared from his own voice, then Jesus confirmed it, and then from Paul, there was only one first adam and he was thee Adam.

Genesis 1:26 “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepiest upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” So it is obvious that this first adam was made in the image of God.

Then you have God giving more details about the creation of the same man and woman. Genesis 2:7 “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Genesis 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23 And Adam said,” This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” Now if as some suppose, that there were already some female evolutionized beasts from Gen 1 who were made in God’s image already, then why create a new female directly out of him? The reason being, but for Adam there was not found an help meet (helper suited) for him. God says the male came first and then he made woman from the male.

Then in Genesis 5 continues the account. Genesis 5:1 “This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. 3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth.” This combines the Adam of Gen 2 with the adam of Gen 1 by reaffirming what he said in Gen 1:26,27. The adam of Genesis 1 was the Adam that was the father of Seth.

Now we go to what Jesus said. In Mark 10 when asked about divorce his reply was Mark 10:6 “But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female (a quote form Gen 1). 7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh (a quote from Gen 2).’ So they are no longer two, but one.” Jesus combines the accounts of Gen 1 and 2 when he quotes from both those two scriptures; he knew they were the same account of the creation of mankind for by him where they created.

Now we go to Paul. 1 Corinthians 11:8 “For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” Here he is talking about the first man and woman and Paul says woman was created for man and came from man; a real Adam and a real Eve created by God. And since Eve was the first woman she was the mother of all the living Gen 3:20.

And in 1 Timothy 2:12 “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.” Again Paul points to the creation of mankind and when he does it is Adam and Eve.

When mankind’s limited knowledge and understanding of Gods creation that he has gained by his physical senses (science) contradicts what God has spoken and revealed by his son Jesus, then I cannot have faith-confidence or trust in mans understanding of those things. Jesus said “I am the way the truth and the life”, mankind should never consider our flawed knowledge of Gods creation as truth.

So when God made mankind, it was Adam and Eve. There were no separate evolved beasts before them so none they could merge with. But as Jesus said “But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female, for this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” From these first two humans came all of humanity and also the Christ, the last Adam, the Son of the Living God. In light of this, faith-confidence-trust has been created in me that Adam was the first man, crafted and formed by God and made alive by his breath of life.
Who of you have that same faith?

2

Hi, Cody, and welcome to the forum! Don’t worry about “incorrect” choices - you’re fine! And yes, while everything you mention has been discussed elsewhere, we are well aware of the necessity of repetition and we all do it. Besides, you have a nice summary here of many key passages which figure prominently in objections over evolution.

By the way, if you want to respond to something specific somebody writes here, just highlight the portion of interest, and click on the grey ‘quote’ box that pops up. That will add their quote into your response (or start a response if you haven’t already done that.) It’s pretty handy, and I’ll use it right here:

If by ‘faith’ you are referring to what you described in your opening paragraph:

…then I am glad to volunteer that I do! And so do a great many others around here, though even those who do not are still welcome here too.

So I give a hearty ‘Amen’ to your opener, and I would even further zero it in to claim: We need to know the Father through Jesus His Son, for in Christ we have eternal life.

Regarding the rest I’ll only give brief (or maybe not so brief as it turns out) response as I’m sure others will chime in too.

I’m assuming you probably believe the earth moves through space. This is the classic example around here of something absolutely not taught in the Bible, and in fact about everyone (without exception?) prior to Copernicus who knew anything at all about Scriptures “knew” full well that in fact the Bible is squarely on the side of a stationary earth - not a moving one. We weren’t wrong to follow the science there, and it caused us to realize that we need to take care what sorts of things we are seeking to “confirm” by our use of scriptures. Not all passages turn out to be literally true when read in that way.

Could I also not claim that it was my own sin that helped put Jesus on the cross? That is a common claim, and I dare say there is even a verse or two to reinforce that concept (without my taking time to look it up right now). And yet … I was not there pounding the nails into Jesus’ hands. So does that conviction become a false one then? Is literal physical truth the only kind of truth that gets to count as such? A lot of us here have realized that such a limiting conception of truth turns out to be a spiritually and scripturally impoverished one.

You are correct that there is much New Testament reference to a literal Adam and Eve by both Jesus and Paul. Is their assertion that all humanity came from them, or that sin started with them any less true if it turns out that Adam and Eve are more representative as archetypal heads of humanity and of our sin and rejection of God than they are a literal couple - does that make all these lessons any less true? If we reject allegory as some lesser form of truth, then apparently Paul did not get that memo, as he very explicitly gives us an allegory (and he even labels it as such in case there was any doubt) in Galatians 4. But then he concludes that we all must be children either of Hagar the slave woman, or Sarah the free woman. Most of us have not literally descended from either of those; so by young-earth creationist logic, we must reject Paul here as bearing false witness, since only literal truth counts. You may insist, “well, Paul told us that this was allegory” - true enough. But there are many other not-so-labeled passages of profound truth that are reduced to absurd falsehoods if we try to see them as literal truths first: Jesus’ flesh and blood being our food and wine, Paul speaking of the armor of God, or of the various parts of “the body of Christ”. You may respond, “well, those are obviously metaphorical” - again, true enough. But my point is only to show that you are already on non-scriptural grounds when you reject metaphor as a lesser vehicle for teaching than literal physical accounts. Jesus often shows exasperation with his disciples for exactly that same habit … “what do you mean you thought I was talking about literal yeast … come’on guys!” So it is long before any science or evolution came along that students of scripture already had the humility of knowing they could misunderstand scriptures (or Christ’s words) forcibly shown to them.

This all isn’t to dissuade you from convictions you wish to hold dear, though if some of those convictions do happen to be false, I would be remiss as a brother to leave them entirely unchallenged, just as you would consider yourself remiss not to warn me if you see me straying in potentially dangerous ways (part of why you’re here, I take it!) And I can appreciate and respect that. I’m sure I’m wrong about a lot of stuff, but I’ll bet we agree that none of that will turn out to be important compared to the all-surpassing value of knowing and being known by Christ. All the rest will be made clear in good time.

Your brother in Christ,
-Merv

3 Likes
3

Actually, the adam in Gen.1 stands to mean for mankind while the Adman in Gen. 2-3 was the historical person we know of as Adam. Here is a chart that will help you see that the accounts of Gen. 1 and Gen. 2-3 are two different separate accounts.

creation-sequence-table
creation-sequence-table817×509 64.6 KB

Gen. 1 is a overview of a blow by blow of creation in a brief and general manner while Gen.2 is an entire separate event that talks about the first two humans coming out of Africa and into the Fertile Crescent and into an Oasis (the Garden of Eden) and they come into contact with God and represent humankind before Him. My view of interpreting Genesis 1-3 is a mix of Proclamation of Days view and the ANE Cosmology view. Here is a chart that explains what I am talking about.
views
views780×532 266 KB

On what you say with Gen.5, the book of the generations of Adam are simply that, a family tree that details the line of Adam, not as of humanity as a whole. On Mark 10 Jesus wasn’t going into the origins of humanity, but was discussing the issue of marriage and divorce.

2 Likes
4

Mervin, thank you for the welcome and the info on using the quote function. Yes it is through Jesus that we can know the father,” he said that if we’ve seen him we have seen the Father”. Yes God has used allegory a lot throughout his interaction with mankind but Adam and Eve are not allegory. What God said in Genesis was not allegory. The flow of his revelation of what happened at the beginning of creation is his expose of the creation of man and then he continues on in the rest of his revelation with his interaction with man up through the apostles. Again, Jesus in Mark 10: 6,7 speaking about marriage said that both man and woman and marriage were created at the beginning of creation. He quotes from Genesis 1: 27 "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female” then he quotes Genesis 2:24 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh” thereby he combines the two accounts of man’s creation in Gen 1 and 2 into one act. In this he speaks with no hint of allegory. To strengthen the fact that this is not allegory and Adam and Eve were the origin of mankind and that their continued life and the life of their decedents are not an allegory we can see what Jesus said in “Luke 11:50-51 Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all.” Keeping in mind the flow of the creation of man in Genesis that God revealed and how Abel is the real offspring of the first man and woman, when Jesus mentions Abel he is speaking of a real person and places him in the category of prophet. If Adam and Eve are allegory than Abel is also, so there would be no truth in what Jesus said. Someone can’t be condemned for the agreement to the murder of an allegorical person. There is no allegory here. And in Hebrews 11:4 “ By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead.” Again, a real man, no allegory.

So yes Mervin in reference to your quote it does matter. For as you said Jesus asserted that all humanity came from them and if he is wrong than the Father is wrong, for Jesus said in John 8:27 “that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.” And again there would be no bases for his condemnation that he pronounced in Luke11. It is for this reason that I don’t have confidence in the flesh to know the true history of mankind by observing the creation. It’s because of man’s trust in his conclusions of what he observes around him more than trust in what God has revealed that leads him to the point where they do what Peter says when speaking of Paul, 2 Peter 3:16 “His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.”
I put no confidence in the flesh and lean not on my own understanding. As it is written, “1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.” Hebrews 11:1-3 1

And “5 By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death; he could not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God. 6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.” Hebrews 11:5-6

5

Sealkin , thanks for responding to the post. I trust that when you reread the above scriptures in my original post and the response to Mervin and understand their flow, it will give you a clearer understanding of what God has said and done. In reference to ANE thought, it appears to me by some of the posts I have read, that some use that to end up degrading and nullifying the Word of God. Kind of like what the Pharisees did with the scriptures. Jesus condemned them for it. Be very cautious.

6

While yes you are true on that and some even use ancient artifacts that show Yahweh among other gods as well and try to use that as evidence that the Bible is a fraud but I see it as proof that the apostasy as told in the OT was true and that there was an apostate form of Yahwehism the Northern Israel and later on Judah did and forsook the LORD.

While I would agree with you in that Adam, Cain, Abel, Seth, Enoch, Noah and the other’s were real historical people and not allegorical types I would disagree with you on Adam and Eve being a primordial couple being the origin of humankind. Genesis 1-11 in my view is not an outright scientific based book and is 100% accurate with the history of the origins of the universe in pure detail. What Genesis 1 tells is that God made in universe and Him alone. The rest goes into how humanity failed to be in relationship with God and how it’s the start of a path to salvation which is concluded in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Gen. 1-11 gives us the small amount of detail we need to know who we humans are in terms with God, our fallen sinful state and how God promised a Redeemer.

7

Looks like misogyny and male chauvinist piggery is alive and well on planet earth. Just because Paul was such as most men were in that time of man’s history (and most of the time following as well), doesn’t mean that we have to do the same.

I quite agree there was only one Adam (except for the metaphor which calls Jesus a second Adam), but I do not agree that he was a golem of dust made by an ancient necromancer long ago. Nor do I agree that Eve was a golem of bone made by magic out of a rib of Adam – taking the poetry and symbolism literally in order to render it safely devoid of actual meaning. It is true that God spoke to Adam first and Adam shared the message with Eve, but man was made for woman as much if not more so than woman was made for man. After all, women do the more important task of bearing children and it is the men who have to find something to make themselves useful to justify themselves, even if they have to invent art, law, and science to do so. Some might include religion in that list of justifications and it would explain a lot of the misogyny and chauvinism which is found there, but only that which is actually from God is of interest to me so the I prefer to clean out all the stuff which is clearly a work of men because it serves their interests in power over others.

But while there was only one Adam, there are certainly more than one creation narrative in the Bible – four in fact. Each telling the story from a different angle and focus.
Gen 1 - focused on mankind being the pinnacle of God’s creation made in the image of God Himself.
Gen 2 - focused on what went wrong and how evil and sin arose in the world.
Gen 5 - A brief intro to the genealogy of Noah.
Gen 6 - giving the answer to the age old question of who did Cain, Seth, etc… marry, and thus describing the relationship between the sons of God coming from Adam and Eve and all the other people filling the Earth that Cain was afraid of in Gen 4.

8

I should probably be taking greater care for my precision and use of terms. Just to be clear (and I don’t think it would change your response to me one bit) but when I say “allegory”, I’m often carelessly using it as a catch-all term for any number of interpretive possibilities that don’t require it to be historically literal. If I was to consult a literature expert, it may turn out that you are quite right and that it isn’t “allegory” at all with more careful discrimination in place of what that actually means. Regarding the rest of your response, I may not say much more here and now other than to register disagreement over the necessity of things to be literally true before they are allowed to function as scriptural truth. But I’ll let others weigh in as I may need to be attending to other things this afternoon. I will be checking back in with interest at some point, though! Thanks for continuing to share your thoughts.

9

Your statement is off my initial topic but I will respond. I’ll comment later on other statements in your post. Here is a short synopsis of Paul.

Acts 9:3-6 As he (Paul) neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” 5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked. “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. 6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.” 15 But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. 16 I will show him how much he must suffer for my name.”

Romans 15:17-19 17 Therefore I glory in Christ Jesus in my service to God. 18 I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done— 19 by the power of signs and miracles, through the power of the Spirit. So from Jerusalem all the way around to Illyricum, I have fully proclaimed the gospel of Christ.

2 Corinthians 12: 12 It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. 2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. 3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) 4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. 5 Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities. 6 For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me. 7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. 8 For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. 9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong. ¶ 11 I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing. 12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

Hebrews 2:1-4 2 We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. 2 For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, 3 how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. 4 God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

Acts 19:11-15 11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul: 12 So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them. ¶ 13 Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. 14 And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so. 15 And the evil spirit answered and said , Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?

10

Just to stick up for my brother Paul here, a man who repeatedly singled out women in his letters as valued co-laborers in gospel work, and who wrote the radical verse in Galatians 3:28 that there is no male or female in Christ…There is good historical documentation that the cultural context of 1 Timothy 2 in Ephesus makes those verses make a lot more sense. 1 Timothy was a letter written to help Timothy respond to pagan ideas that were affecting the faith and practice of the Christians in Ephesus.

Ephesus was the center of the worship of the goddess Artemis, who was presented as a huntress who stood for chastity and the rejection of marriage. Evidently in the Ephesian church, some false teachers were banning marriage because the local worship of Artemis elevated celibacy. Paul’s instructions to virgins in Ephesus are to get married, whereas in Corinth he encouraged them to remain single. Clearly his instructions about these things were responding to a specific cultural situation.

Artemis was the first-born twin (her brother was Apollo) and it was part of the belief system there that her first-born status gave her dominance over Apollo and by extension, gave females dominance and superiority over males. Paul’s words in 1 Timothy 2:12-14 should be taken as a polemic against the Artemis cult teaching, (a teaching that had women as it’s primary adherents and teachers) not as a statement about all women and men for all time. It was the women in the Ephesian church that were especially causing the problems.

Some have argued that many of the instructions to women in 1 Timothy are related to their cultic practices related to fear of childbirth. Artemis was the goddess of childbirth because according to Greek myth she watched her mother labor for nine days to birth her twin and had great empathy for laboring women. She was also believed to be sovereign over who lived and died in Ephesus. Women petitioned Artemis for safe deliveries by presenting her with expensive garments and jewelry which were also worn when praying to her for safe deliveries. Paul corrects these false ideas by instructing women to dress simply and trust God for safety through their childbirths.

All that to say, it’s not just Genesis that needs to be read in its cultural context. “Plain meaning” will lead you astray all the time.

10 Likes
11

Very interesting information, didn’t know any of this. I have understood the verse about adornment from the Wesleyan-Holiness point of view and I still feel there is a point to be made on being content with the stuff we have and not to lavish ourselves with useless (note useless and not outright do away with adornments) but I can now see the cultural-historical context of the issue he brings up to the women.

Yes, Paul was very egalitarian for his time when it came to gender roles. Not as egalitarian we here in the modern 21st century Western world would like but it was a start. Paul had to work with the mindset of his time.

2 Likes
12

On the dress, we often think of modesty in terms of sexual propriety, but in Paul’s writings it is usually linked with not flaunting wealth. So there is that aspect too.

3 Likes
13

Or as I would put it… Christianity is defensible with regards to women’s rights even if particular statements of particular persons and in particular Bible passages are not. After all the Bible is what I like to call a 4-dimensional message, i.e. one which is written over a great deal of time and reflecting the considerable changes in human thinking, changes in social relationships, and changes in mankind’s relationship with God.

14

Definition of golem 1: an artificial human being in Hebrew folklore endowed with life.
Definition of necromancy1: conjuration of the spirits of the dead for purposes of magically revealing the future or influencing the course of events

Why is it so difficult to trust that God actually formed the first man from dust and then breathed into him the breath of life? Not a golem but a living creation made in God’s image. In the end he will take the lifeless dust from the earth which was our earthly body and change it into a spiritual body. He has laid the foundation for use to know that he can do this by raising Jesus from the dead and then promises those who trust, love and obey him have that same hope.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power (a necromancer? NO, an almighty God), when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Romans 4:17 As it is written: “I have made you (Abraham) a father of many nations.” He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed — the God who gives life to the dead and calls things that are not as though they were.
John 11:14 So then he told them plainly, "Lazarus is dead, 15 and for your sake I am glad I was not there, John 11:17 On his arrival, Jesus found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb for four days. 11:23 Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” 24 Martha answered, “I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” 25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26 and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?” 27 “Yes, Lord,” she told him, “I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who was to come into the world.” John 11:38 Jesus, once more deeply moved, came to the tomb. It was a cave with a stone laid across the entrance. 39 “Take away the stone,” he said. “But, Lord,” said Martha, the sister of the dead man, “by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days.” 40 Then Jesus said, “Did I not tell you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?” 41 So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. 42 I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me.” 43 When he had said this, Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!” 44 The dead man came out, ( Jesus did this by the word of his power) his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face. Jesus said to them, “Take off the grave clothes and let him go.” 45 Therefore many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did, put their faith in him.” I too have put my faith that it is he who gives life where there was no life. It is he that breathes life into mankind, not just to make them a living being but also he is the life giving spirit that breaths life into a dead spirit such as I had and made a new creation.

Revelation 20:11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, (the dead are raised) and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.”

I’m inserting the following as an encouragement to be faithful to Jesus till death. Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. 11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men;

Jesus said in John 5:43 “I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. 44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?” The scriptures I quoted in the original post revealed what the Father said and what Jesus heard from the father about Adam and Eve and and Paul by the Spirit confirmed it. Yet people do not receive it. But they will receive what a man who comes in his own name says. They receive adoration and commendation for the great “truths” they uncover in the ground, sky and everywhere else. They are confident and adamant in proclaiming that they know what happened billions of years ago but I would assume most will not acknowledge their creator and giver of life. Because many trust in man’s knowledge they turn away from God and most people will not even confess with faith in him that Jesus came to earth about 2000 years ago. They can’t tell me about 2000 years ago but they can preach to me about billions of years ago. I am no expert or even a novice in the study of God’s creation but I have seen enough of what man has deduced by observing it to know the utter confusion and conflicts in opinions, conclusion and beliefs about it and they expect me to trust them over God’s word.
Hebrews 11:3 By faith we (I Cody) understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

15

Hi Christy,
The reason for quoting 1 Timothy 13 and the other scriptures was that the apostle Paul, with all the authority and revelation in Christ that he had, confirmed that a real first man Adam was formed first, then Eve. Again, in Mark 10:6,7 Jesus blends Gen 1 and 2 together to form a declaration of who that man was. That was the purpose of the post. From one man and woman came all humans. No beasts of the field that changed into a human.

16

When reading a fantasy comic book we then we accept whatever it says no matter how it contradicts the realities of life in order to enjoy the story. And to be sure there are quite a few people who would not consider the Bible to be anything different than one of those. But when you take something to be about reality then such fantastical elements are considered to be literary devices such as poetry, metaphors, parables, and symbolism, such as when Jesus speaks of seeds being scattered upon the path. And when the disciples ask Him why he speaks in parables, Jesus explains that those who have no interest in the truth are thus allowed to close their eyes and ears to see and hear only what they want to believe.

But things are not independent of the means by which they are created. Growing up and having to learn everything is part of what it means to be a child and so if you just carve it out of wood, then no matter what machines you put inside to make it talk or whatever then what you have is a doll not a child. Likewise something formed of dust, clay, stone, bone, or other material and injected with some mythical (but completely nonexistent except in fairy tales) “stuff of life,” are the golems of comic books and fantasy not human beings – something which is attributed to necromancers among others in various fantasy stories and games.

We are not made of dust but mostly water and oils with a mere 5% or less with any similarity to dust. But you can say that we are made of matter and particles which in the language of the times, when and where the Bible was written, we might indeed use the word “dust.” But this matter/particles is not only constantly changing during our lives but is likewise recycled over and over again after we die and none of it can be said to belong to a particular person. Besides the spiritual body is not made of dust or the stuff of the earth but of something quite different, the stuff of heaven, which is not subject to the laws of nature and decay (1 Cor 15). You might like the Hollywood zombie movies having people crawl out of graves, but I think that is rather grotesque as well as absurd.

But while you may consider that to require selling out your rationality as payment for your salvation (apparently just so you can exclude scientists from your private self-righteous club), I do not. I think this is free gift of Grace to everyone, including scientists.

17

Just because Paul quoted the narrative about a Jewish literary figure does not mean that the Adam he referred to was definitively the first human being ever. Paul was making a rhetorical point and using Jewish literature the way Jewish teachers were accustomed to using Jewish literature to support other arguments they were making at the time. Paul was not making a scientific statement about natural history. Adam was indeed formed first in the story they were all familiar with. That was what he needed to serve his rhetorical purposes here.

18

@Cody_G

Indeed! The point not being that we cannot or should not believe that there was such a person, I certainly believe their was. But the Bible and the message of Christianity does not require us to do so. There is more than enough room for both science AND Christianity, with a great number of theological options for working out the difficulties between them.

1 Like
19

Paul quotes Epimenides and says in Titus 1:12 “Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.” This saying is true."

Should we therefore believe that because Paul quoted it and said it was true, now and for all time Christians should have a low opinion of people from Crete?

5 Likes
20

Again when Jesus condemned the experts of the law about the murder of Abel in Mt 23:35 and Lk 11:51 was he speaking about a literary person? No he was quoting the very word of God about a real son of the real original Adam. You don’t get condemned for the murder of a person in a allegorical story or fairy tale. As Jesus says in the next verse Luke 11:52 “Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering.” Man with all his speculations, explanations, and perverted twisting of God’s word remove it’s power to reveal God and his Christ and his ability to deliver mankind from both the power of sin and the judgement on the those who continue in sin.

Jesus quotes God’s revelation from Genesis to Moses, of Moses he says Matthew 5:18
“I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” and also the prophets, declaring it as the very Word Of God and affirming it as historical. From Genesis to John the baptist, Christ is foretold. God says in Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me.10 I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come." So is this Jewish literature or is it God’s revelation of himself to us?

Jesus says in John12:44 Then Jesus cried out, “When a man believes in me, he does not believe in me only, but in the one who sent me. 45 When he looks at me, he sees the one who sent me. 46 I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness. 47 "As for the person who hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge him. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it. 48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day. 49 For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Father who sent me commanded me what to say and how to say it. 50 I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.”
The difference between the mindset that makes much of God’s revelation of himself and also what Jesus said, into only some kind of Jewish literature written by man to be used as good instruction, in contrast to what it is, the revelation of God and his Christ, is the difference between sin and righteousness, the Lake of Fire and the New Jerusalem.