RE: [asa] The Fall of man (Adamites)

Hi Bernie:
 
I can't prove that none of Adam's generations ventured beyond the
Mesopotamian plain in 3,000 years but at least the concentration would
have been in cities that bore the brunt of the flood. The Sumerian king
lists begin in Eridu archaeologists dated to 4800 BC and the first two
names are Akkadian, or Adamic, names. Erech, (Cain's city of Enoch)
dates to 4200 BC. Likewise other nearby cities had pre-flood
beginnings; Larak, Lagash, Sippar, Kish, and Shuruppak, all of which
likely housed Adam's descendants. The Sumerians were concentrated a
little further east and some survived to rebuild cities destroyed by the
flood. Whether it was a "good thing" or not, I can't say. All I can
say is that there is ample evidence for a local flood around 2900 BC and
no evidence for a global flood anytime since the advent of humans, and
no evidence any of Noah's kin escaped except for him, his three sons,
and their wives.
 
Dick Fischer, author, lecturer
Historical Genesis from Adam to Abraham
 <http://www.historicalgenesis.com> www.historicalgenesis.com
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Dehler, Bernie
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 6:20 PM
To: ASA
Subject: RE: [asa] The Fall of man (Adamites)
 
"It terminated the Adamic race who had become polytheistic and maybe
idol worshipers to boot. The Sumerians survived as did all populations
all over the globe who were living at 2900 BC."
 
It is a good thing the "Adamites" all stayed together, because if they
spread out over the globe like other humans, a global worldwide flood
would have been necessary to reach them all, instead of a local flood as
I think you propose, Dick.
 
.Bernie
 
  _____

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Dick Fischer
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 3:13 PM
To: ASA
Subject: RE: [asa] The Fall of man
 
Hi Moorad, you wrote:
 
>>According to Scripture, God brought about the flood to "start over"
with humans. Is it very absurd to suppose that man was created "perfect"
and, after the Fall, humans had to go through what we presently see,
which is interpreted as evolution?<<
 
The flood was judgment. It terminated the Adamic race who had become
polytheistic and maybe idol worshipers to boot. The Sumerians survived
as did all populations all over the globe who were living at 2900 BC.
The "start over" was with Noah and his progeny who were keepers of the
covenant. The "fall" necessitated Christ. As a human being Adam was
not capable of refraining from sin. I don't see evolution in any
theological context.
 
Dick Fischer, author, lecturer
Historical Genesis from Adam to Abraham
www.historicalgenesis.com <http://www.historicalgenesis.com/>
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Alexanian, Moorad
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 11:35 AM
To: AmericanScientificAffiliation
Subject: [asa] The Fall of man
 
According to Scripture, God brought about the flood to "start over" with
humans. Is it very absurd to suppose that man was created "perfect" and,
after the Fall, humans had to go through what we presently see, which is
interpreted as evolution?
 
 
Moorad
 
 
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jun 20 08:40:10 2008