Adam and Eve 'amongst' the first humans?

[smaller]

Names and their meanings were important in the bible. So consider Genesis 3:20 when Eve is named Eve. Because she is the mother of all living.

God called both of them, Adam. Gen. 5:2. Essentially called them both, in that term, "natural people." 1 Cor. 15:42-46. Red mankind/of the earth. Dust n blood.

 

[smaller]

Good point and something else to consider is that Jesus is the Light and it is He that created everything. (John 1:1-3)

Brilliant deduction! There are a few schools of theology sights that say we are still in the 6th day of Adam, awaiting the true 7th Day Sabbath Rest. I kind of agree with that sight from the spiritual aspects. Heb. 4:9. Kind of puts "day" in scriptural terms into perspective.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

Eve isn't actually Eve...it's Hawwa
Eve is Latin...Hawwa is Hebrew.

Looks like your right but it still doesn't change the context. In Wikipedia, it says "Eve in Hebrew is Ḥawwāh, meaning "living one" or "source of life", and is related to ḥāyâ, "to live". The name derives from the Semitic root ḥyw." In the bible it says Adam named her Eve/Hawwāh, because she is the mother of all living.

God called both of them, Adam. Gen. 5:2. Essentially called them both, in that term, "natural people." 1 Cor. 15:42-46. Red mankind/of the earth. Dust n blood.

Had to look that up. Not use to the KJV's wording. If one translation says God called them Man, and another says God called them Adam, then it could be an issue of translating the word to English that is interchangeable for Adam and mankind.

The context of Adam naming his wife a name that means mother of all live, should signify something about the context. Either that Adam and Eve were the first of mankind (or arguably the second making of mankind if the first age of man was wiped clean from history) that context would also help explain the reason God made Eve out of Adam's rib. The only other option I can see for why Eve would be named that is if Adam was prophesying that all future generations would be linked to her lineage. Instead of the other people of that day. But that explaination still doesn't fit with God making Eve out of Adam's rib if there were other women there for him to have as his wife.

 

[smaller]

Looks like your right but it still doesn't change the context. In Wikipedia, it says "Eve in Hebrew is Ḥawwāh, meaning "living one" or "source of life", and is related to ḥāyâ, "to live". The name derives from the Semitic root ḥyw." In the bible it says Adam named her Eve/Hawwāh, because she is the mother of all living.

I wasn't trying to pick on you. I believe and agree that Eve is the mother of all living natural human beings. Was just footnoting that in Gods Eyes He called them both Adam from the Gen. 5 citing. It also ties in nicely with 1 Cor. 15:42-46.

Had to look that up. Not use to the KJV's wording. If one translation says God called them Man, and another says God called them Adam, then it could be an issue of translating the word to English that is interchangeable for Adam and mankind.

The context of Adam naming his wife a name that means mother of all live, should signify something about the context. Either that Adam and Eve were the first of mankind (or arguably the second making of mankind if the first age of man was wiped clean from history) that context would also help explain the reason God made Eve out of Adam's rib. The only other option I can see for why Eve would be named that is if Adam was prophesying that all future generations would be linked to her lineage. Instead of the other people of that day. But that explaination still doesn't fit with God making Eve out of Adam's rib if there were other women there for him to have as his wife.

I don't put much spiritual credence in anything Adam claims myself. The natural man really never "got it" to start with and wasn't meant to. 1 Cor. 2:14.

I also think the Spirit was against and contrary to the flesh right from the start, Gal. 5:17, because it, that flesh, was Divinely meant for temporary dust compilation use only, in temporarily housing the son of God, Adam, Luke 3:38, that dust compilation also quite purposefully Divinely intended to pass away at the end of the "day" of mankind. Don't think God in Christ had any long term interests in dwelling in a biologically organized dust pile, with us.

As to the opening posters questions, I don't think any of us can logically refuse to look at time itself in the scriptures from different perspectives, rather than ticks on a 24 hour earth day clock. To me that kind of insistence is, well, ignorant.

Today we know that time is "relative" by pretty good science methodology.

 

[sparrow]

Whenever I see post's like this........I often think of the results left behind after the global flood of Noah's day. It is my understanding that the shifting of soil, the transporting of animal and human remains to distant locations, especially from the receding water running down from the mountains, and the tremendous pressure from the amount of water in various locations, would have fossilized any dead remains of man & animals.

At first glance, archaeologists would consider a dating system from all the different layers of soil and rock formations. Again, the receding water from the mountains, and the water pressure would, IMO, cause the earth to appear very old compared to how old it actually is. I believe that the "flood" does not enter into most archaeologists mind who are not Christians and are not aware that a universal flood even existed.

Just something to consider....A long time ago, I attended a seminar on "The Flood" by Dr. John Whitcomb. He taught from a biblical standpoint...."The Genesis Flood" ....https://answersingenesis.org/bios/john-whitcomb/ is a good website for more info. I would challenge anyone who does not realize what terrific changes to the earth's surface came about because of the flood. There is a wealth of important knowledge just waiting for you to discover.

Nicely put. Another good resource would be icr.org

 

[JohnDB]

Looks like your right but it still doesn't change the context. In Wikipedia, it says "Eve in Hebrew is Ḥawwāh, meaning "living one" or "source of life", and is related to ḥāyâ, "to live". The name derives from the Semitic root ḥyw." In the bible it says Adam named her Eve/Hawwāh, because she is the mother of all living.
.

Wasn't suggesting that you were wrong contextually. You are correct.
The issue (kinda a side issue) is the way the names are sometimes changed into Latin equivalent and sometimes not.

Granted sometimes it helps but sometimes not. The whole Peter/Cephas thing is where it gets confusing...and the Joshua/Jesus is another point of contention.
Especially when there is a wordplay going on with the names as in Jacob/Israel.

If they had translated the names consistently with the original scripture into English...it would help me show the poetry and allusion of what was being said easier.

 

[Chopper]

Nicely put. Another good resource would be icr.org

Thank you my old special friend. For a while there, I missed seeing your posts. I just want you to know how much I love you and knowing that your all right and active again. You are one of the "steady's" of this Forum, I always looked forward to what you had to say. I especially need to hear from a real "man of God" of which you are. Please don't hold back your godly wisdom and biblical knowledge, we all need you. I sure hope you stick around here for a long time now. It's great having you back.

 

[jasonc]

Eve in Hebrew ,askenazi, is Chava.

Adam is Ish

 

[OzSpen]

I know its common teachings that Adam and Eve are the very first humans, and that we are all descendants of them, but is this really true? The earliest human found by archaeologists is 2.8 million years old ( http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31718336 ). But Adam is said to only be about 6000 years old (correct me if I'm wrong).

Really nowhere in Genesis does it say Adam was the 'first man.

Where in the Bible does it say that Adam was 6,000 years old?

You say that Genesis does not say Adam was the first man. Aren't these verses in your Bible? Gen 2:20 (ESV); Gen 3:17 (ESV); and Gen 5:5 (ESV).

You'll need to go to the whole Bible (not just Genesis) to determine that Adam was the first man. We find that 1 Cor 15:45 (ESV) confirms that 'Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit'. See Hos 6:7 (ESV); 1 Cor 15:22 (ESV); 1 Tim 2:13 (ESV).

So, Scripture teaches that the first created human beings were Adam and Eve.

Oz

 

[JohnDB]

Adam and Tommy Tomato have something in common...

No belly button.

 

[FallenSoldier]

So if Adam and eve was the first humans...then wouldn't their offspring have to commit incest to reproduce? that's against the law of god..doesn't make sense

 

[JLB]

I know its common teachings that Adam and Eve are the very first humans, and that we are all descendants of them, but is this really true? The earliest human found by archaeologists is 2.8 million years old ( http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31718336 ). But Adam is said to only be about 6000 years old (correct me if I'm wrong).

Really nowhere in Genesis does it say Adam was the 'first man.' The story of Adam and Eve came in Genesis 2, but before that in Gensis 1:26, it is said "Then God said, 'Let us make human beings in our image, to be like us.' ... So God created human beings in his own image. In the image of God he created them; male and female he created them." Continuing in Genesis 1:28, "Then God blessed them (the 'human beings') and said, 'Be fruitful and multiply.'" Be fruitful and multiply; so the first humans could have been reproducing before Adam was ever created. Humans were created on the sixth day of creation, then the seventh day God rested.

Then in Gensis 2:5 " neither wild plants nor grains were growing on the earth, For the Lord God had not yet sent rain to water the earth, and there were no people to cultivate the soil." I suppose you could say this means that there literally were no people, but I don't believe that to be entirely true. Saying there were no plants, no grains, nothing to farm. The early humans were hunters and gatherers. This is saying that the early hunters and gatherers did not know how to farm.

Continuing in Genesis 2, God creates Adam (Gensis 2:7), before creating Eden (Gensis 2:8). Adam, I'm guessing, was the first farmer (Gensis 2:15). But this is aside the major point. Jumping ahead to Cain and Abel in Gensis 4, when Cain kills his brother Abel, God punishes him. Cain, in Gensis 4:14, is scared for his life, and says " ... Anyone who finds me will kill me!" Who is anyone? God then puts a mark on Cain to warn this 'anyone' who tries to kill him. Then in Gensis 4:17 "Cain had sexual relations with his wife..." Who was his wife? It is only said that Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel. Some people believe that Adam and Even had many children at the same time of Cain and Abel. They did have 'other sons and daughters' (Gensis 5:4), but this seems to be AFTER Cain and Abel. Even still, if there were other daughters of Adam along with Cain and Abel, to have sexual relations with his own sister was incest, which is sinful to God. You can say that that law was not written yet (incest is talked about in Leviticus 18:6), BUT, the Word has ALWAYS existed (John 1:1). An unaccounted action of incest doesn't seem right in the Bible. The first acknowledgement of incest I know of is after Sodom and Gomorrah (Gensis 19:30 - end of ch. 19)

This could possibly be old news for some of you here, but perhaps not. I am by all means not teaching, I don't want to teach for various reasons, I am just sharing my thoughts and recent discoveries and I greatly accept any criticism or arguments against anything I've said.

This is the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day they were created. 3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. 5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.

6 Seth lived one hundred and five years, and begot Enosh. 7 After he begot Enosh, Seth lived eight hundred and seven years, and had sons and daughters. 8 So all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years; and he died.

9 Enosh lived ninety years, and begot Cainan.10 After he begot Cainan, Enosh lived eight hundred and fifteen years, and had sons and daughters. 11 So all the days of Enosh were nine hundred and five years; and he died.

12 Cainan lived seventy years, and begot Mahalalel. 13 After he begot Mahalalel, Cainan lived eight hundred and forty years, and had sons and daughters. 14 So all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years; and he died.

15 Mahalalel lived sixty-five years, and begot Jared. 16 After he begot Jared, Mahalalel lived eight hundred and thirty years, and had sons and daughters. 17 So all the days of Mahalalel were eight hundred and ninety-five years; and he died.

18 Jared lived one hundred and sixty-two years, and begot Enoch. 19 After he begot Enoch, Jared lived eight hundred years, and had sons and daughters. 20 So all the days of Jared were nine hundred and sixty-two years; and he died.

21 Enoch lived sixty-five years, and begot Methuselah. 22 After he begot Methuselah, Enoch walked with God three hundred years, and had sons and daughters. 23 So all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years. 24 And Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.

25 Methuselah lived one hundred and eighty-seven years, and begot Lamech. 26 After he begot Lamech, Methuselah lived seven hundred and eighty-two years, and had sons and daughters. 27 So all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred and sixty-nine years; and he died.

28 Lamech lived one hundred and eighty-two years, and had a son. 29 And he called his name Noah, saying, “This one will comfort us concerning our work and the toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord has cursed.” 30 After he begot Noah, Lamech lived five hundred and ninety-five years, and had sons and daughters. 31 So all the days of Lamech were seven hundred and seventy-seven years; and he died.

32 And Noah was five hundred years old, and Noah begot Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Genesis 5:1-32

Those of the pure human seed that was created by God, came from Adam.

Sin spread to all men because of Adam's transgression.

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. Romans 5:12-14

The reason death spread to all men in the world, is because it came from Adam, the first man.


JLB

 

[FallenSoldier]

Nothing makes sense unless our Father is revealing his knowledge via His Holy Spirit.

Perhaps God doesn't want us to be 100 percent certain on things like that. Like JohnDB said, the bible more about the relationship between man and God rather than the history of the world. I guess thats the nature of the Old Testament, though. Difficult to understand if you try to understand it...if that makes sense. For me atleast. I think I'll stick with childrens books about Old Testament stories like Noah and the Ark, seeing all the funny animals crammed in a boat at sea.

 

[handy]

Where in the Bible does it say that Adam was 6,000 years old?

You say that Genesis does not say Adam was the first man. Aren't these verses in your Bible? Gen 2:20 (ESV); Gen 3:17 (ESV); and Gen 5:5 (ESV).

You'll need to go to the whole Bible (not just Genesis) to determine that Adam was the first man. We find that 1 Cor 15:45 (ESV) confirms that 'Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit'. See Hos 6:7 (ESV); 1 Cor 15:22 (ESV); 1 Tim 2:13 (ESV).

So, Scripture teaches that the first created human beings were Adam and Eve.

Oz

I was going to hit a "like" button, but I couldn't find one.... but very good, Oz! You stated exactly what I was thinking up to the various texts you shared.

I do think there is some room in Genesis for an older earth and for the days of creation being longer than 24 hours, however the Scriptures make it clear that Adam was the first human created and Adam being the first human created is central to the gospel as 1 Cor15:45 points out and Romans 5 backs up.

 

[GodsGrace]

So if Adam and eve was the first humans...then wouldn't their offspring have to commit incest to reproduce? that's against the law of god..doesn't make sense

Actually, FallenSoldier this is what is believed by manline Christian churches.
Remember that the Law was not given yet at the time of Adam and Eve.

You have to believe the above, or you have to believe that when Adam and Eve were banned from the Garden there were other humans living outside the Garden. This cannot be the case if Adam and Eve were the first humans.

I had the thought one time that maybe cavemen existed and then one day God decided to turn them into what we are. The link has never been found so it seemed reasonable to me. But it isn't. We cannot make up our own story. We must go by what the bible teaches or we'll be faced with the prospect of everyone making up their own genesis story.

Since it must be accepted as it is, your deduction is correct.

Wondering

 

[turnorburn]

Adam was 930 years old.. when he died..

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:

4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:

5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

The earth is 6000 years old give or take..

 

[OzSpen]

I was going to hit a "like" button, but I couldn't find one.... but very good, Oz! You stated exactly what I was thinking up to the various texts you shared.

I do think there is some room in Genesis for an older earth and for the days of creation being longer than 24 hours, however the Scriptures make it clear that Adam was the first human created and Adam being the first human created is central to the gospel as 1 Cor15:45 points out and Romans 5 backs up.

handy,

Thank you for your kind words. I, like you, do not consider these are 6 twenty-four hour days because of the various ways 'day' (yom) has meaning in Gen 1-2 ESV.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Adam was 930 years old.. when he died..

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:

4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:

5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

The earth is 6000 years old give or take..

tob,

The age of Adam tells us nothing about the time involved in the genealogies between Adam and you and me in 2016.

There is controversy among biblical scholars over whether or not there are gaps in the genealogical records.

Oz

 

[jasonc]

Ish may mean man or as in mankind .Hebrew is funny like that. the shabat is the key why jews take it literally. we believers are often klueless on how or why jews worship the way they do .Names are titles an may be impersonal. i know some see Hasatan that way an others wont see satan that way. its not his name if you but a description of how he acts.

 

[JohnDB]

tob,

The age of Adam tells us nothing about the time involved in the genealogies between Adam and you and me in 2016.

There is controversy among biblical scholars over whether or not there are gaps in the genealogical records.

Oz

Absolutely correct. We don't know because where the Bible contains history it isn't a history book...the names are Titles as jasonc has suggested...and the genealogical tables say things with the titles listed. (Nothing not revealed in other scriptures so deciphering them is a rather long and difficult exercise for very little...but at times it is rather ironic jokes)