Was Adam truly the FIRST man ever?

Blocked

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 29 2011,01:50)

The consensus is to believe that they were created spiritual beings from their beginning. But what piece of information or what scripture provides the proof of this?

This is from the Book of Enoch, which was thought to be “scripture” by Jesus' disciples. It is part of the judgement handed down by God to the angels who had procreated with human women:

1Then addressing me, He spoke and said, Hear, neither be afraid, O righteous Enoch, you scribe of righteousness: approach hither, and hear my voice. Go, say to the Watchers of heaven, who have sent you to pray for them, You ought to pray for men, and not men for you.

2Wherefore have you forsaken the lofty and holy heaven, which endures for ever, and have lain with women; have defiled yourselves with the daughters of men; have taken to yourselves wives; have acted like the sons of the earth, and have begotten an impious offspring? (23)

(23) An impious offspring. Literally, “giants” (Charles, p. 82; Knibb, p. 101).

3You being spiritual, holy, and possessing a life which is eternal, have polluted yourselves with women; have begotten in carnal blood; have lusted in the blood of men; and have done as those who are flesh and blood do.

4These however die and perish.

5Therefore have I given to them wives, that they might cohabit with them; that sons might be born of them; and that this might be transacted upon earth.

6But you from the beginning were made spiritual, possessing a life which is eternal, and not subject to death for ever.

7Therefore I made not wives for you, because, being spiritual, your dwelling is in heaven.

I have just begun looking at Enoch. I don't know anything about the book except for that it was quoted by disciples of Jesus. So I don't know if this really teaches us anything or not.

I do find it interesting that God gave men wives so they could keep reproducing………….because men die. (Verse 4 and 5) Was it ALWAYS God's intention for men to die, since he created a wife for Adam before they had even sinned?

mike

August 30, 2011 at 1:03 am#365308

Blocked

Quote (david @ Aug. 29 2011,01:12)

Adam and Eve
Cain
Abel
Seth (130 years after Adam; 5:3-5, another seed in place of Abel; 4:25)
Enosh (105 years after Seth was born)
Kenan (90 years after Enosh born)
Mahalalel (70 years after Kenan)
Jared (65 years….)
Enoch (162 years)
Methuselah (65 years)
Lamech (187 years)
Noah (182 years)
Shem/Ham/Japheth (Noah 500 years old, and by flood, 600)

Looking at just this evidence, it seems like they were having a whole lot less children than I previously thought.

That's how I've always seen it, David. But you and Pierre could be right that these men had other children before the one mentioned. Although, it seems odd to me that Moses only recorded that they had other sons and daughters AFTER the one mentioned. He never says “before AND after”.

And I still think it's odd that Eve said Seth was to REPLACE Abel if she already had many youngens running around.

I find it interesting that if Abel had children, then there would be no need for Seth to fulfill the “righteous line”. So apparently Seth hadn't procreated by the time he died.

And I still wonder, if there WERE many other offspring, why they would be living “hidden from the presence of God” by choice.

It is a mystery to me. But my “caveman” theory does allow for the fossils we've uncovered that date to much longer ago than 6000 years.

mike

August 30, 2011 at 1:05 am#365309

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 30 2011,11:52)

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 29 2011,01:50)

The consensus is to believe that they were created spiritual beings from their beginning. But what piece of information or what scripture provides the proof of this?

This is from the Book of Enoch, which was thought to be “scripture” by Jesus' disciples. It is part of the judgement handed down by God to the angels who had procreated with human women:

(23) An impious offspring. Literally, “giants” (Charles, p. 82; Knibb, p. 101).

4These however die and perish.

5Therefore have I given to them wives, that they might cohabit with them; that sons might be born of them; and that this might be transacted upon earth.

6But you from the beginning were made spiritual, possessing a life which is eternal, and not subject to death for ever.

7Therefore I made not wives for you, because, being spiritual, your dwelling is in heaven.

I have just begun looking at Enoch. I don't know anything about the book except for that it was quoted by disciples of Jesus. So I don't know if this really teaches us anything or not.

mike

Thanks for that Mike.

August 30, 2011 at 1:08 am#365310

Participant

Quote (Pastry @ Aug. 29 2011,20:57)

t8 True, the Bible doesn't say how the Angels were created… Neither does it show us how Jesus was created, when there was nothing in the beginning… But since God is Spirit and only Spirit can be with God, I still believe they were Spirit Beings. Of course I could be wrong in all of this…Both Jesus and the Angels are messengers for God, so they can appear as Human Beings… We have felt that also that two Angels saved our only Granddaughter when She jumped of the second floor Balcony, when She was only two years old….Two man walked away from Her… She was taken to the Hospital and there was not a scratch on Her….Your right one day we will know…Irene

Wow.

Quite possibly men who did a good deed with no expected recognition, or heavenly visitors intervening.

August 30, 2011 at 1:14 am#365311

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 30 2011,02:47)

all

Ge 6:1 When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them,

what do you think this means ?

now how can they chose?;Ge 6:2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose

Ge 6:3 Then the LORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years.”
of cause because of sin now men is mortal,

Ge 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—

could those be the ones that could arm Cain ?

Pierre

Quite possible.

It appears that there was unlawful intervention among mankind by heavenly beings who perhaps even looked like us.

Maybe a spiritual body can step down a dimension or two to become physical or subject to physical laws? And when we are raised we are transformed the other way.

August 30, 2011 at 1:15 am#365312

Participant

Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 30 2011,09:25)

Quote (Pastry @ Aug. 29 2011,20:57)

Hi Irene,

The bible doesn't say Jesus was (according to Irene) created?
Clearly you are reading into the text; are you not?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Ed! Now Ed I went around the circle with Kathi, so I am not going to do this with you…. It says from several translators that He was the beginning of the creation of God..not according to Irene
.
Rev 3:14 ¶ And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;
Irene

August 30, 2011 at 1:17 am#365313

Participant

Irene. Does that mean he was the first created or the one whom creation came through?

August 30, 2011 at 1:23 am#365314

Participant

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 30 2011,12:17)

Irene. Does that mean he was the first created or the one whom creation came through?

t8 It says that He is the beginning of the creation of God, does it not…

August 30, 2011 at 10:42 pm#365315

Participant

There are several articles on this subject, however most are bias to the trinity doctrine, so they will not say that Jesus was created….

Colossians 1:15 – Did Jesus Have a Beginning

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. — Colossians 1:15

One claims that Colossians 1:15-20 makes no sense except in the context that there is a trinity. And, yet, in order to get the trinity doctrine into the the verses, one has use the great human spirit of imagination, assumptions based on what is imagined, add those assumptions to, and read those assumptions into, the passage being discussed.

We should note first that “God” is used unipersonally in the phrase “image of the invisible God.” The word “God” is referring, not to three persons, but to one person. The context shows that the word “God” is being used to denote the one person, “God, the Father of our Lord Jesus.” (Colossians 1:13) Again, Colossians 3:1, we read that Jesus sits at the right hand of “God”, and it should be apparent that “God” is there unipersonal, not tripersonal. “God” refers to one person, the God and Father of Jesus. (Ephesians 1:3; 1 Peter 1:3) All through the New Testament, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always presented as the one person: the God and Father of Jesus. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is never, not even once, ever presented as more than one person.

So what the trinitarian has to do is use his spirit of human imagination so as to imagine that “God” refers to the assumed first person of the trinitarian assumptions. Then they have further use his spirit of human imagination to image that “He,” which refers to Jesus, means the imagined second person of the trinitarian assumptions. And thus, in this manner the trinitarian assumptions are added to, and read into, what Paul wrote. In reality, the phrase “image of God” shows that Jesus is not the

The scriptures are quite plain on the fact that Jesus came into existence through a creative act of God. This can be clearly seen from Colossians 1:15, in speaking of Jesus: “who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation”.

Two things in this verse show that Jesus had a beginning and that he was created.

First, its structure shows that he came into living existence by a creative act. The rule of Greek grammar on the partitive genitive proves this, because the construction, “firstborn of every creature [or all creation]“, is in Greek grammar called the partitive genitive, that is, the genitive which contains as a part of its contents the thing or things mentioned in the noun that governs the genitive. The expression, “the firstborn of every creature,” being in the Greek a partitive genitive, it includes as a part of itself the thing implied in the noun that governs it, that being “firstborn.” Therefore, it implies that the firstborn one is a part of creation and, accordingly, was created and thus had a beginning.

Additionally, Jesus’ being called “firstborn” of every creature, or of all creation, proves that he came into existence by a creative act, even as those who are the afterborn of creation came into existence by a creative act. Being born of God as the first of the creation spoken of, he is not Yahweh the Almighty who gave this birth to him.

Some claim that his scripture teaches that Christ is over all creation; the ruler of all creation, and thus that Jesus is apart from the class of created beings.

The word “firstborn” is always used in either of two settings: as being the firstborn offspring of a father (as in Genesis 25:13), or as being part of the group being spoken of. Nevertheless even when used as the firstborn offspring of a father, it is still the group of children that the offspring of the father that the firstborn is a member of. For instance, In Exodus 11:5 we find: “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of the group that would make up Pharaoh’s offspring. Still, since Colossians 1:15 is definitely not saying that Jesus is the offspring of creation, making the creation the father, the other alternative is that Jesus is definitely included as part of the creation of which he is firstborn. In no case does “firstborn” mean that the firstborn did not have a beginning, or that the firstborn is not included in the group of which he is firstborn.

See our studies:

Psalm 89:27 – Yahweh’s Firstborn King for study on Psalm 89:27.

Genesis 34:7 – The firstborn nation, Israel

Jeremiah 31:9 – Ephraim as Yahweh’s firstborn

Someone objects that when prototokos (the Greek word translated firstborn in Colossians 1:15) is one of the class referred to, the class is plural , as in Colossians 1:18 and Romans 8:29.

The Greek singular of creation is often used by Paul and others to denote the collective whole of creation. See: Mark 10:6; 13:19; Romans 1:20; 8:19,20,21,22; Revelation 3:14.

Another objection that many put forth is: If Paul meant to convey that Christ was the first created being, why did he not use the Greek word protoktistos, which means “first created”?

One could ask a similar question concerning Paul usage of firstborn in Colossians 1:18, such as why didn’t he say “first raised” from the dead, rather than “firstborn” from the dead?

There is no record that the word protokistos was in common use in Paul’s day. If the word protokistos (which nowhere appears in the Bible) had been used, then the thought would have been shifted from the rights of the one who is firstborn to his being the first created. Paul was not emphasizing that Jesus was the first created, but rather that Jesus held the rights of heirship as the firstborn of all creation. This in no way negates the fact that the firstborn one is included in the group spoken of; it certainly does not provide any reason to change its meaning in this case from the meaning shown in its usage throughout the scriptures.

Nevertheless, Clement uses the terms prototokos and protokistos almost interchangeably. He refers to Christ the “first created” and later the “firstborn”. In his work Stromata Clement calls Christ “first-created” [TON PROTOKTISTON]. He also composes the line [referring to Proverbs 8:22]: TES SOPHIAS TES PROTOKTISTOU TO THEO. [“Wisdom that was the first created of God.”] “Clement repeatedly identifies the Word [John 1:1] with the Wisdom of God [Proverbs 8:22], and yet he refers to Wisdom as the first-created; while in one passage he attached the epithet ‘first-created,’ and in another ‘first-begotten,’ to the Word. At a later date a sharp distinction was drawn between ‘first-created’ and ‘first-born’ or ‘first-begotten,’ but no such distinction was drawn in the time of Clement, who with the Septuagint rendering of a passage in Proverbs [8:22] before him could have had no misgiving as to the use of these terms. Clement makes a sharp distinction between the Son and the Word who was begotten or created before the rest of creation and the alone Unbegotten God and Father.” [Clement of Alexandria, John Patrick (1914)] Thus, we recognize that while this does not mean that these two terms mean exactly the same thing, it does indicate that the idea of “first created” (protokistos) is included in the word “firstborn” (prototokos).

Additionally, we find this in Justin Martyr’s Dialogue With Trypho: “But this Offspring which was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father communed with him; even as the Scripture [Proverbs 8:22-31] by Solomon has made clear that he whom Solomon calls Wisdom, was begotten AS A Beginning BEFORE all His creatures and as Offspring of God … We [Christians] know [Christ] to be the first-begotten of God, and to be before all creatures. … He is the Son of God and since we call him the Son, we have understood that he proceeded before all creatures from t
he Father by His power and will.” Thus Willis B. Shotwell remarks: “The language here is such that it cannot be argued that Justin considered the Logos to be eternal

. The most that can be said about the Logos is that he was created before anything else.” (The Biblical Exegesis of Justin Martyr, London 1965)
–
*Evidently Shotwell is using the term “eternal” here to mean an eternal past.
It is claimed that “God begets God” and thus if Jesus is Son of God, that this makes him God Almighty himself. This would limit God’s ability to produce a Son who is not the Supreme Being, based on the limited procreative powers that God placed upon the material creation. (Genesis 1:11,12,21,25) Of course, God is not so limited, and he can bring forth a Son who is not the Supreme Spirit Being that he himself is. Believing that if God has begotten a son, that the son must be equal in every way to the Father who begot him, the trinitarian and many others reason that the Son must also be Supreme Being. And since the scriptures declare only one Supreme Being, they come up with the idea of more than one person in the one Omniscient Supreme Being. Nevertheless, God did not use any kind of reproductive powers to bring forth his Son, as though he were limited like humans and other animals in this respect, so that his Son would, in effect, have to be himself. Yahweh set the limits of reproduction on the animate material creation, not upon himself.
The evidence suggests that the translation is correct in thought where it has Jesus in his prehuman existence stating: “The Lord (Yahweh) created (qanah) me at the beginning of his work (derek), the first of his acts of long ago. Ages (olam) ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth.” (Proverbs 8:22, New Revised Standard Version) Thus Jesus had a beginning, and does not have to be God who begot him in order to be the Son of the God who begot, or brought him forth in creation.
See:
Proverbs 8:22,23 Proof that Jesus Existed in an Eternal Past?
God is not so limited as man is, nor did God bring forth a son in the same way that man does. Of course, Jesus, in his prehuman and posthuman existence, is of the same substance as God, that is “spirit”. While in the days of his flesh, Jesus was not a spirit being — he was human, a little lower than the angels, nothing more, nothing less. (Hebrews 2:9; 5:7) Jesus gave up as an offering his being — his soul [Hebrew, nephesh, Greek, psyche], represented in his blood (Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 17:11; Deuteronomy 12:23) — as a human, which offering includes the human body that God had prepared for just such an offering for sin. — Isaiah 53:10,12; Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25,34; Luke 22:19,20; John 6:51-56; 1 Corinthians 10:16; 11:25-27; 15:21,22; Romans 5:15-19; Colossians 1:14,22; Hebrews 9:7,12,14,26,28; 10:5-12.
Revelation 3:14
Regarding Revelation 3:14 where Jesus is called “the beginning of the creation of God: He is not called the “beginner” of the creation of God. This would not only be a mistranslation, but would contradict the second part of the expression: “of the creation of God”. If the creative act is God, then God must have at least begun it alone; therefore the Son of God did not begin it. Revelation 3:14 thus proves that God started the creative work by bringing the Logos, God’s firstborn, into existence. This would mean, then, that the Logos, as a created being, is a part of creation and, therefore, was both created and hence had a beginning.
Hebrews 1:6
An additional proof is found in Hebrews 1:6, where Jesus is called Yahweh’s firstborn. Thus these scriptures do prove that God created Jesus. Therefore Jesus is the firstborn of God, the later born ones of God including angels (Job 38:7), Adam and Eve (Luke 3:38) and God’s Gospel-Age children (John 1:12; 3:3,5).
John 3:16
In John 3:16 we find further proof of this. There Jesus is called “the only begotten Son.” The fact that he was begotten proves that Jesus was a creation of Yahweh. The further fact that he is called the only begotten “Son” proves the same thing, for the word “son” implies either a direct or an indirect act of creation. As applied to Jesus it would be a direct creative act of Yahweh — one which Yahweh alone exercised, without the assistance of any other agency. Seeing that Yahweh created everything else indirectly, that is, through the Word (John 1:3), it would therefore be proper to call Jesus the “only begotten.”
John 1:18
This is further corroborated by John 1:18: “No man has seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him.” Some of the best manuscripts call Jesus here “the only begotten God (Mighty One)” instead of “the only begotten Son.” Whichever version we accept makes little difference in the sense, because the only begotten Son is an only begotten God, a mighty one, mightier than all other gods, the Father excepted, and because an only begotten God (mighty one) would be the only begotten Son of the only true Supreme, the Father. (John 17:3) In either case the passage shows Jesus’ pre-human creation by Yahweh and proves that Jesus had a beginning. The same can be said of John 1:14 and 1 John 4:9, for to be begotten implies a beginning and a coming into existence.
Ezekiel 21:30 equates birth as a form of creation.
Cause it to return into its sheath. In the place where you were created, in the land of your birth, will I judge you.
Isaiah 43 equates “being formed” with creation:
Isaiah 43:1 But now thus says Yahweh who created you, Jacob, and he who formed you, Israel: Don’t be afraid, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by your name, you are mine.
Isaiah 43:7 everyone [in reference to the peoples of Israel to be regathered] who is called by my name, and whom I have created for my glory, whom I have formed, yes, whom I have made.
Isaiah 43:22 – the people which I formed for myself, that they might set forth my praise.
Also notice:
Isaiah 46:3 – Listen to me, house of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, that have been borne [by me] from their birth, that have been carried from the womb;
Isaiah 49:1 – Listen, isles, to me; and listen, you peoples, from far: Yahweh has called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother has he made mention of my name:
Additionally, we find that Yahweh speaks of Israel as his firstborn:
Exodus 4:22 – You shall tell Pharaoh, ‘Thus says Yahweh, Israel is my son, my firstborn. See also Deuteronomy 14:1; Jeremiah 31:9; Hosea 11: 1;
Yahweh “made” and formed Jacob (Israel) from the womb.
Isaiah 44:2 – Thus says Yahweh who made you, and formed you from the womb, who will help you: Don’t be afraid, Jacob my servant; and you, Jeshurun, whom I have chosen.
Isaiah 44:21 – Remember these things, Jacob, and Israel; for you are my servant: I have formed you; you are my servant: Israel, you shall not be forgotten by me.
Isaiah 43:1,6,7 – But now thus says Yahweh who created you, Jacob, and he who formed you, Israel: Don’t be afraid, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by your name, you are mine…. I will tell the north, Give up; and to the south, Don’t keep back; bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the end of the earth; 7 everyone who is called by my name, and whom I have created for my glory, whom I have formed, yes, whom I have made.
Deuteronomy 32:6 – Do you thus requite Yahweh, Foolish people and unwise? Isn’t he your father who has bought you? He has made you, and established you.
Commonly, however, in NT scriptures, the words creation and created are limited in application either to the intelligent creation (which includes the angels as well as humans, powers, principalties in heaven or earth — Colossians 1:15); things created in heaven and earth (Revelation 5:13; 10:16), or more often, it is limited in applic
ation by context to the world of mankind, “the creation” having been subjected to vanity/futility. — Mark 10:6; 13:19; 16:15; Romans 8:19-22; Colossians 1:23; Hebrews 9:11; 2 Peter 3:4.
When Jesus said to “preach the gospel to the whole creation”, was he not referring to the mankind as a creation, but yet also as the offspring of Adam? Paul uses the word “creation” in a similar way in Romans 8:19-22. In Colossians 1:15, however, the word “creation” appears to be applying to all the intelligent creation, both in heaven and earth. The rule of Greek grammar on the partitive genitive proves that Jesus is being here referred to as the firstborn creature, because the construction, “firstborn of every creature [or all creation]“, is in Greek grammar called the partitive genitive, that is, the genitive which contains as a part of its contents the thing or things mentioned in the noun that governs the genitive. The expression, “the firstborn of every creature,” being in the Greek partitive genitive, includes as a part of itself the thing given in the noun that governs it, that being “firstborn.” Therefore, it shows that the firstborn one is a part of the creation spoken of and, accordingly, was created.
The expression “firstborn of all creation” is further shown to include Jesus as a creature as can be seen from similar usage in Revelation 1: 5: “firstborn of the dead”. Jesus was indeed dead, a member of the group of which he was the firstborn, and was the first to be fully made alive from the dead, never to die again. That Jesus was actually a member of those dead can be seen a few verses further, for Jesus says: “I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore.” (Revelation 1: 18) Later on, Jesus is referred to as the one “who was dead, and has come to life”. (Revelation 2:8) Further, Paul tell us that “Christ died, rose, and lived again.” (Romans 14:9) Jesus is not being spoken of as simply a ruler over the dead. Certainly, however, as being the first to actually be made alive from the dead, he possesses the right of firstborn in that sense also, thus we read: “Christ died, rose, and lived again, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.” (Romans 14:9) Thus Colossians 1:18 tells us: “He is the head of the body, the assembly, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.” The usuage of “firstborn”, however, both in Revelation 1:5 as well as Colossians 1: 15, does not mean that the one spoken of as firstborn is not a member of the group of which he the firstborn.

August 31, 2011 at 12:17 am#365316

Blocked

Hi Irene,

Thanks for that post! For a minute, I almost thought I had written it, for I've said almost all of these same things to people here!

Could you tell me where you found it? I'd love to read more from this person.

peace,
mike

August 31, 2011 at 12:47 am#365317

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 31 2011,11:17)

Hi Irene,

Thanks for that post! For a minute, I almost thought I had written it, for I've said almost all of these same things to people here!

Could you tell me where you found it? I'd love to read more from this person.

peace,
mike

Hi Mike! I just googled “Is Jesus the beginning of the creation of God”. And this among other articles came up…. There are several of them that have, like I said before, a bias of the believe of the trinity…. good luck…. peace Irene

August 31, 2011 at 2:03 am#365318

Blocked

Okay. Thanks, Irene.

September 1, 2011 at 4:30 pm#365319

Participant

Mike! Did you find the article on the Internet? I went back, and I couldn't find it again….. And I also seen you say part of it to Kathi, and that I can't find either….:D
I hope you did…..Peace Irene

September 2, 2011 at 3:37 am#365320

Blocked

No Irene,

I haven't looked yet. What I posted to Kathi came from what you posted in this thread.

September 4, 2011 at 12:32 am#365321

Participant

Mike! I was reading there…. I also don't believe she will ever again believe that Jesus was the the created Son of God….it is making me so sad, because Kathi used to believe what we all did, not to long ago….
Peace Irene

December 24, 2011 at 7:58 am#365322

Wakeup

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 22 2011,05:27)

Hi All,

I have pondered this hard and long. I have been scoffed at and reminded that Adam is said to be the first man ever, and that Eve is the mother of all living.

But it never set well with me that when Cain was banished, he was afraid that “others” would kill him; and so God put a sign on him so the “others” wouldn't bother him.

WHO WERE THESE “OTHERS”?

And from where did Cain obtain a wife after being banished?

People are quick to point out that not every child of Adam and Eve were mentioned by name, so they may have had hundreds of children by the time Cain murdered Abel. But WHY were these already willingly living in the land of Nod, since it seemed such a bad punishment for Cain to be sent to that place?

And how does that add up to Eve saying this in 4:25: “God has granted me another child in place of Abel, since Cain killed him.”

That seems to be an odd statement if the couple already had hundreds of unmentioned children.

And I've wondered why the story of man's creation is told once in Genesis 1, and then again, mentioning Adam and Eve, in Genesis 2.

I've always thought in my own mind that these “men” created on the sixth day were more like the cavemen of old. And Adam represented the first man in which God placed His own Spirit.

Any comments?

mike

Hi Mike.

Thefirst man Adam was made flesh,and the second Adam was made spirit. does this anwer your question?

GEN 5:4.AND THE DAYS OF ADAM AFTER HE BEGOTTEN SET WERE EIGHT HUNDRED YRS:AND HE BEGAT SONS AND DAUGHTERS.So cain must have taken one or more sisters to the land of nod.And abel also before he was murdered, must have wifes and children.Dont forget that they must have lived at least 100yrs before cain murdered him.God never mentions daughters but only the sons that concerns him,or the bible would be thick and heavy to carry.God also only mentions the world empires that concerns him,not all the world empires.

Not forgetting Gods command to adam:BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY.

I hope it is getting clear my bradda.

wakeup.

December 24, 2011 at 9:12 am#365323

terraricca

Participant

Mike

Quote

Hi All,

I have pondered this hard and long. I have been scoffed at and reminded that Adam is said to be the first man ever, and that Eve is the mother of all living.

But it never set well with me that when Cain was banished, he was afraid that “others” would kill him; and so God put a sign on him so the “others” wouldn't bother him.

WHO WERE THESE “OTHERS”?

And from where did Cain obtain a wife after being banished?

And how does that add up to Eve saying this in 4:25: “God has granted me another child in place of Abel, since Cain killed him.”

That seems to be an odd statement if the couple already had hundreds of unmentioned children.

And I've wondered why the story of man's creation is told once in Genesis 1, and then again, mentioning Adam and Eve, in Genesis 2.

I've always thought in my own mind that these “men” created on the sixth day were more like the cavemen of old. And Adam represented the first man in which God placed His own Spirit.

Any comments?

mike

I believe that with what had happened in Eden (Adam kick out of it ) all who have seen this would know that God is in power,and so could say and separate people and cover the earth ,this he did again at the tower of babel wen he confused men with their tongue,

see Adam was cursed and had to leave paradise ,and be outside of it ,

but when Cain killed his brother again a curse came down on the murderer Cain and he was sent away from the land and the presence of God ,for a land yet worst than Adam ad to go to,,,the others could mean the wild beast in that are ,but I do not think it is other men ,God only created one couple and from them we are the offspring.

Pierre

December 24, 2011 at 4:47 pm#365324