RE: [asa] Does ASA believe in Adam and Eve?

There are two aspects to early Genesis, historical/anthropological and
theological. It may be easier to explore the first and overlay
theological ramifications then to mix the two up and try to present it
in one package. Let me give a quick synopsis in a few short paragraphs.

Jacquetta Hawkes has a book, The Atlas of Early Man, which shows the
world and what areas were populated at different time periods going back
to 50,000 years ago. If you looked at a world map at roughly 7,000
years ago for Adam and 5,000 for Noah there are many millions of people
all over the world map during these time periods, so it is virtually
impossible that the entire world’s population could emanate from either
of them.

Adam enters a populated world in the midst of the Ubaidans who migrated
from the north when they constructed a canal off the Euphrates River at
Eridu. Eridu is the first city in Mesopotamia in archaeological terms
at 4800 BC, it is the sacred city of the Sumerians and Akkadians, and
that is where the Sumerian king list says kingship was “lowered from
heaven.” The land between the rivers was called the “edin” meaning
“plain,” “prairie,” or “desert.” So a river (canal) went out of Eden
(edin) to water the garden. The Garden of Eden was irrigated and Adam
didn’t do the digging.

The 2900 BC flood terminated all the Adamite population we know as
Akkadians, except for Noah and family. The flood decimated the
Sumerians some of whom survived by retreating to the mountains to the
east, but left untouched the rest of the populated world. That would
include the Egyptians when Narmer was pharaoh at 3000 BC, the early
Persians at Susa who wrote in cuneiform in a language we have never
deciphered, the early Hittites who also had an unrelated language, the
population at Nineveh who built a city 1,000 years before Asshur
discovered it, and probably the city of Ebla which became a Canaanite
city.

The Sumerians moved back into the region of Sumer and reestablished the
cities destroyed by the flood. The first city was Kish and the next
city where kingship was established was Uruk, biblical Erech, or “Enoch”
the city originally built by Cain. According to Josephus, Noah and his
family remained in the region where the ark landed. My best estimate is
somewhere in the region of Kirkuk either in Iraq or possibly in Iran
south of the Lower Zab and east of the Tigris. This was the land of the
early Kurds though they migrated north and the ark landing site migrated
with them. I have doubts the ark got as far north to beyond Nineveh
(Mosul) which had an earlier flood deposit but nothing corresponding to
2900 BC. Jebel Judi is north of Mosul and uphill, and Mount Ararat is
out of the question. But I’m not adamant about the arks landing site.
Though when the Semites came from “the east” to Babylon, well Iran is
east and Ararat (Urartu) is north.

Upon Noah’s death 350 years after the flood the families of Ham, Shem,
and Japheth set out to populate their apportioned lands, according to
Josephus. This amount of time allowed them to reconstitute. They had
knowledge of how to fashion bronze weaponry so the pre-existing
populations were no match for them. Japhethites went north and west and
out of the biblical picture. There is no mention of any Japhethite
descendants beyond the third generation in the OT. Hamites and Semites
didn’t venture too far. Elam took over Susa. Heth established his
family among the “Hittites” who then are named for him. The Amorites
settled in Mesopotamia. Joktan began the Semitic Arabs who to this day
distinguish themselves from the Hamitic Arabs from Ishmael. Mizraim
went to Egypt. Canaan took a land not apportioned to him which God
directed Abraham to go to. And so forth.

In some cases the sons of Noah conquered and displaced the people who
had been living there. In some cases they blended in as in Egypt. And
in some cases they were simply absorbed into the surrounding culture.

In a nutshell that sums up the inception and migrations of the Adamites
and Noachides, also called Akkadians.

The theological aspects are more complex and debatable. Contrary to
some on this list I believe the image of God means simply a
representative of God. The Israelites were not to make any graven
images (representations) of God, for example. Adam was “created” in
God’s image – meaning he was appointed to represent God and introduce a
new era of accountability. Whether Adam had natural parents is an open
question. Through genetics we may some day know the answer to that, but
I believe longevity was part of the package. That explains the 900+
years between Shem and Abraham in the Septuagint and the time between
the flood at 2900 BC and Abraham at 2000 BC. It explains why Asshur was
thought to be a “god,” and why Gilgamesh sought out the reclusive
Utnapishtim (Noah) in search of immortality.

All living at the time of Adam could have achieved the same status Adam
had if he had done his job. The mission fell to Noah who became a lush.
Next was Abraham who did approximately what he was told. Then the
Israelites were the chosen people to bring the news of God to their
neighbors, but for the most part remained aloof. Then Christ, who truly
was in God’s image, made this status available to all. I believe today
the IOG comes through Christ, it is not a birthright.

Dick Fischer

Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association

Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History

 <http://www.genesisproclaimed.org> www.genesisproclaimed.org

-----Original Message-----
From: George Murphy [mailto:gmurphy@raex.com]
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 10:06 PM
To: Dick Fischer; ASA
Subject: Re: [asa] Does ASA believe in Adam and Eve?

OK, that's clear. Now sometimes you've said that Adam was the ancestor
of the Israelites & sometimes of the "covenant people." What covenant
do you mean? If it's just Israel then presumably it's the covenant at
Sinai. I have been assuming that that's what you mean & that's why I
described the fact that the peoples listed below (& more) are portrayed
as descendants of Noah - & thus of Adam - as "devastating" for your
view. But maybe you mean the Noachic covenant. That would mean that
the Egyptians, the Ionian Greeks (Javan) & many others - but not the
Chinese or Native Americans &c - are descended from Adam. So which do
you mean?

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

----- Original Message -----

From: Dick <mailto:dickfischer@verizon.net> Fischer

To: ASA <mailto:asa@calvin.edu>

Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 12:36 PM

Subject: RE: [asa] Does ASA believe in Adam and Eve?

Hi George:

I think it would be well nigh impossible to fabricate a list of
patriarchs retroactively based upon discovery of ancient populations and
then ingeniously devise who begot who. And it would be the mother of
all coincidences that peoples discovered just happened to bear the names
of Genesis patriarchs. It seems far more logical to me that the people
who bore the names of their ancient forefathers came from actual people.
So yes, put Westermann and me in separate camps on this issue, however,
Westermann was a first class scholar and I am in agreement with many of
his conclusions. It’s just that I have the benefit of close proximity
to the Library of Congress where most others don’t.

Take Asshur, Noah’s grandson, as one case alone.

Asshur (Gen. 10:11) began the Assyrian empire in the northeast corner of
Upper Mesopotamia where the Tigris runs from northwest to southeast. A
vassal treaty of Esarhaddon ( <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/681_BC> 681-
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/669_BC> 669 BC), son of Sennacherib
(705-681 BC – see 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles and Isaiah), who had been
murdered while on the throne, carried a seal naming “Ashur,” founder of
Assyria, as a god. And appropriately, Esarhaddon named his son, who was
crown prince at the time, “Ashurbanipal” in honor of him. Just as
Tubalcain descended from Cain so too some Assyrian kings were named
after their famous forefather, i.e. King Ashurnasirpal II of Assyria
(833-859 BC) and the 38th king on the earliest Assyrian king list was
"Puzar-Assur.”

This quote is from The Cambridge Ancient History:

The knowledge about some of the cities buried under these mounds was
never lost. That the mound of Nimrud on the east bank, close to the
point where the Greater Zab flows into the Tigris, was the town of
Kalakh mentioned in Genesis 10:11 was told by the natives to a British
representative of the East India Company who explored the site in 1820.
They even knew that the country to which this town had once belonged was
named ‘al-Assur'.

Dick Fischer

Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association

Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History

 <http://www.genesisproclaimed.org> www.genesisproclaimed.org

-----Original Message-----
From: George Murphy [mailto:gmurphy@raex.com]
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 1:48 PM
To: Dick Fischer; ASA
Subject: Re: [asa] Does ASA believe in Adam and Eve?

Yes, many of the names listed in Gen.10 can be identified with nations
known from secular history in the ancient world. I was going to go on
to the implications of that but it wasn't what I was asking. Are these
_just_ names of nations or do you think this chapter in fact gives
genealogies of real individuals from whom those nations descended &/or
were named? Westermann (Genesis 1-11, p.504), e.g., takes the 1st view.
In reference to the "sons" of Japheth: "The 'sons' are peoples or
countries. The genealogical pattern is only the form of presentation;
it is not meant to indicate descent. Only Japheth is a person; he does
not stand for a people or country. The same holds for Shem and Ham; all
three are only the names of persons and they are part of the tradition
history of the flood. They do not belong to the table of nations, but
act as a connecting link with it."

This seems plausible to me, though I'm a little cautious about saying
what the biblical author "meant." In any case, can I assume that you
don't hold that view but think that the references to Gomer &c as sons
of Japheth, Ham & Shem are to real historical individuals?

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

----- Original Message -----

From: Dick Fischer <mailto:dickfischer@verizon.net>

To: ASA <mailto:asa@calvin.edu>

Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 10:11 AM

Subject: Re: [asa] Does ASA believe in Adam and Eve?

Hi George, you wrote:

Just so we're not talking at cross purposes, am I right in assuming that
you read Gen.10 as a collection of real genealogies - i.e., that the
people who are listed there are biological descendants of Noah's 3
(real) sons?

Working back from Abraham we can trace as far as Shem’s children, Elam,
Asshur, Arpachshad, Lud, and Aram. Elam refers to a people, Elymæans,
concentrated around Susa initially, the ancient capital. Elamites are
encountered first as Persians speaking a non-Semitic language. Scholars
place Elam at the head of this Persian culture, and he is listed as a
king in Persian history books. Asshur, of course, founded Assyria.
Arphaxad is known as the forbearer to the Chaldeans, Arphachshad was
called Arruphu by the Akkadians, and was known to Hurrians in the Nuzi
tablets as Arip-hurra.

Scholars from the time of Josephus have concurred that the Lydians
descended from Lud, called the Luddu from the annals of Ashurbanipal.
Lydians were famed archers in the ancient world. In Josephus, “Aram was
father of the Aramites, whom the Greeks call Syrians ...” The
Aramaeans, founded by Aram, situated themselves in various parts of
Syria and Mesopotamia, and the Aramaic language stems from the children
of Aram.

In short, almost every one of the enumerated children stemming from the
three sons of Noah can be found somewhere in the ancient world. It’s in
my upcoming book.

Dick Fischer

Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association

Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History

 <http://www.genesisproclaimed.org> www.genesisproclaimed.org

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Mar 24 11:26:45 2007