Re: How to interpret Adam (was: Re: Kerkut)

So you think that there are "genuine humans" i.e. those created in the image
of God, theologically defined Man, that were around tens of thousands, or
more, years before Adam could have existed?

Do you believe that Adam was a true historical figure? Lets assume that is
the case for a second, and Adam was "created" 7000 or so years ago.

The theological problem with this view, is that sin entered the world
through Adam, and death through sin. I dont think you believe that all the
preadamites were immortal or sinless do you? Your scenario would require
that.

Also, I think that the Genesis account of Adam, indicates that he was indeed
something new. The Hebrew word used in the account of mans creation, is the
same used to describe the creation of the world. Adam, the first man, was
created, he was not made. He was created in the image of God. He was
something new.

So, to summarize what I think the bible clearly tells us: Adam was a true
historic figure, he was the first "genuine human", and he brought sin and
death to all men.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Ruest" <pruest@mail-ms.sunrise.ch>
To: "drsyme" <drsyme@cablespeed.com>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>; "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>; "Dick Fischer"
<dickfischer@earthlink.net>; "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>; "D.
F. Siemens, Jr." <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: How to interpret Adam (was: Re: Kerkut)

>
> drsyme wrote:
> < Peter said:
> << Yes, if we want to both take Adam and Eve as a literal human pair and
> respect what we know from science, there are just these two possible
> interpretations: either (1) Adam is placed into the Pleistocene (or even
> earlier), or (2) there were genuinely human Preadamites. Solution (1)
> requires us to ignore the clearly Holocene environment the Bible presents
us
> in Gen.4-5, whereas (2) requires us to understand Adam as the
> representational head of humanity, rather than a biological founder.
Neither
> of these two solutions is straightforward, and it is a matter of opinion
> which one to prefer. By the way, a solution (3) of refusing to accept Adam
> and Eve as a literal human pair is even less straightforward. I don't
> believe either (1) or (3) to be more acceptable theologically than (2). >>
>
> < What do you mean by genuinely human here? If you mean biologically
> human, ok, but couldnt there be more to being human than just biology?
> Could a 4th possiblity be that Adam and Eve were true historical figures
> that God created in his own image around what 7000 years ago, give or
> take a few thousand. There were other homo sapiens around then of
> course, and prior to this, but somehow Adam and Eve were different,
> spritually only perhaps, a difference that science is unable to discern.
> And we are all descendants of Adam and Eve only. >
>
> No, I mean theologically genuinely human, i.e. created in the image of
God.
> But I don't place that at 7000 years ago, but much earlier, because there
is
> so much suggestive or even stronger evidence, in earlier humans, for
> characteristics like animal sacrifices, burials, art, language etc., which
> are hard to reconcile with a creature that would not have the capability
of
> responding to God's call.
>
> I agree that the spiritual dimension characterized by God's image need not
> be traceable in biological terms. We cannot identify "theologically
genuine
> humans" with Homo sapiens, or modern H.sapiens, or the genus Homo, or any
> other biologically defined taxon. Or, maybe sometime we'll be able to do
> that, but at present we just don't know enough.
>
> On the other hand, according to the cultural indicators mentioned in
Genesis
> for their immediate descendants, I do place Adam and Eve at around 7000
> years ago. But I cannot consider them the biological ancestors of us all.
> And I don't know of any convincing theological argument why they should
be.
> And of course there is ample evidence that much of today's human
population
> cannot be descended from a common Mesopotamian ancestor of 7000 years ago.
> That's why I see solution (2) presented in my post to which you are
> responding as the most reasonable one at present, while having all of
> today's humans descend from a couple 7000 to 10,000 years ago is quite
> impossible.
>
> Peter
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Ruest, CH-3148 Lanzenhaeusern, Switzerland
> <pruest@dplanet.ch> - Biochemistry - Creation and evolution
> "..the work which God created to evolve it" (Genesis 2:3)
Received on Thu Feb 26 06:28:30 2004