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

I believe the “moral law” or covenant was first established with Adam,
reestablished with Noah and further established with Abraham. Mosaic
law was established at Sinai. Occasionally God likes to restate things
for new people so they keep updated. The Sumerians, Egyptians and
everybody else was outside the camp so to speak. (But there are lots of
people more poetic about this than I am.) Egypt existed before Mizraim
got there so when the OT uses Mizraim for Egyptians it may mean
everybody or just those from him. Elamites were named for Elam but
originally they spoke an unrelated language so presumably those original
aborigines were unrelated to the Semites or Sumerians even though later
they were dubbed Elamites.

The covenant relationship seems to follow the line of promise from the
beginning. That is it does not appear to follow family relationships
once they branch off. The covenant with Noah followed Shem not Ham or
Japheth. The covenant with Abraham followed Isaac not Ishmael. The
covenant with Moses followed the children of Israel and remained with
them until the time of Christ. Of course Christ established the New
Covenant with us all. All this in my humble opinion.

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 Tue Mar 27 15:30:43 2007