> General Discussions

Adam the " First Man?"

(1/4) > >>

mickiel:


I was listening to some of Rays vedios and was happy to hear him say that there were humans before Adam. I mean the science and archaeology is there, we can't deny it. So many religious people do deny it, but the evidence is somewhat overwhelming, if one can see it. In 1Corinth. 15:45 Adam is called " The first man." I have wondered about that for some time now. Just what that means.

Not really knowing, it simply intrest me beyond end. In the next verse, 46, it states the spiritual is not first, but the natural man is first. I have wondered if that could explain why God created Primordal man first? And could it be possible that the humans before Adam, simply were not created with a working consciousness, were not given what Adam was given, an image of God. Or a concrete consciousness with potential blooming personality,  knowledge, or the beginnings of a " Civilized mind." ( Which eventually led to the creation of civilization.)

It makes sense to me that Adam had to have something that Primordal humans didnot have, which could explain why he was even called the " First Man." Perhaps he was the first man with Consciousness, and the first human God dealt with on a closer level. I am not saying he had Gods Spirit, I don't know that he did, I doubt it. But he had something that changed the direction of humanity from primordal humans, who obviously had very little advancement in millions of years, and after Adam there was a dramatic  change in human history that eventually led to civilization.

I have told a few friends of mine that I am beginning to think that Primordal humans may not have been conscious, as we are conscious; of course some of them think I am nuts! They may have been so " Earthy" that they existed solely on a very high level of instinct. I wish I knew " Why" God even created them in the first place. His reason behind it.

I just thought I would throw this out here and see what some of you think of it?

Foxx:
others may chime in on this, I may be way off but its just my two cents. Adam is the one from which Jesus Christ eventually come from. I think is the importance of "first Adam" and "second Adam". Yes there is evidence to suggest there were other people prior to Adam but did God breath life into them them same way like Adam? I do not believe so. To say they had no conscience or awareness would be skeptical. 

The implication that they were an "experiment" for God is a stretch. That assumes he didn't know what he was doing and we know that he does KNOW ALL.

mickiel:

--- Quote from: Foxx on June 04, 2012, 02:36:25 PM ---others may chime in on this, I may be way off but its just my two cents. Adam is the one from which Jesus Christ eventually come from. I think is the importance of "first Adam" and "second Adam". Yes there is evidence to suggest there were other people prior to Adam but did God breath life into them them same way like Adam? I do not believe so. To say they had no conscience or awareness would be skeptical. If they were people then God made them for a reason just like us.

The implication that they were an "experiment" for God is a stretch. That assumes he didn't know what he was doing and we know that he does KNOW ALL.

--- End quote ---


I agree that God didnot breathe into the cavemen what he did into Adam, there have to had been a difference, but the difference was I think moreso a " Design", not to imply an experiment. Designing is not experimentation when you know exactly what your doing, and of course God did. Just as the earth was designed to bring forth grass and other things from within it, I think God was designing primordal man, and designed them to go through certain changes, ( what science calls evolution). Human to human changes, not animal to human as some suggest. When God designs something to change, that is not experimentation; such as pupi to butterfly. It would just be natural from his design onward.

I do realize I am being somewhat skeptical in assuming they had no consciousness like ours, I tend to think they were more animal like, as compared to us. Not in appearence, but in characther, personality, education, even perhaps having no religions. As far as we know, they had no education, no agriculture, no government, no biblical scriptures, no transportation, no technology; no signs of those things which display consciousness in a people.

I am sure God had his reasons for creating them, Isaiah 25:1 " Plans formed long ago with " Perfect Faithfulness", reveals a way of God that is not wasteful. I just tend to think in terms of " Why" Adam is called the first man, when he was not the first human. And I think Consciousness explains that, or is one of the keys in helping us to understand this.

Who would think that God would create a whole race of humans who were not as conscious as we are? Not as aware; not as responsible? I think its quite interesting, the possible implications.

doug:
Mickiel, Hey!  Nice to meet you!
I have also been intrigued with this subject.

I believe that pre-adamites can indeed fit into the biblical scheme, verified with science and history.  Here are some ideas to consider:

"it is not good that man should be alone: I will make him a helper comparable to him."  Gen 2:18

That fact that God had to make Eve as a helper "comparable" to Adam implies that there were no women "comparable" to Adam, not that there were no women living at the time.  The order of "kind after kind" had to be maintained.  Possibly Adam could not "breed" ( I know, a crude term, but true) with another humanoid woman.  A man and woman of the same kind or race are comparable.

"there was no man to till the ground"  Gen 2:5.  The literal translation to this is "there was no adam to till the ground".  There were none of the adamic "kind" on earth before Adam was created,, but there were other humanoid "kinds".

Eve is called the "mother of all living"  Gen 3:20 and Adam "the first man was of the earth".  I Cor 15:45 & 47.

It is inferred that the verse which says Eve is called the mother of all living means she is the mother of all races.  Then if we were to take this literally, then why can't we say that she is the mother of all things that breathe, i.e. all animals?  All of these are "living" things.  I believe it should mean nothing more than that Eve was the mother of all the Adamic race and not the animal humanoids that pre-existed.

The first man, Adam, is of the earth, earthy, and the second man, Christ, is the Lord.  Now, if the "first" is meaning universally, then so is the word "second" which means Christ was the second human being on earth.  We both know that that certainly isn't so!  Those Corinthian verses are comparing Adam and Christ spiritually and not to imply that there were no other prior humanoids (pick your own term - caveman or whatever).

When God cursed and cast out Cain, God placed a "mark" on Cain, "lest any finding him should kill him."  I believe Gods statement indicates other people existing at the time of Adam, Eve and Cain.

I have heard of other defenses arguing that no others could have possibly existed before Adam & Eve and then coming to this scripture, their arguments then seem to me distorted.  One theory being that because of the longevity of Adam & Eve they bore many other sons and daughters and that sons married sisters, cousins etc. down the line and that it wasn't wrong or sinful because the incest law hadn't been established as of yet by God through Moses.  And not only that, the purity of the blood at the beginning was free of diseases so that the issue of abnormalities we would normally be faced with today through interbreeding (like the Hatfields and McCoys that is being discussed on another thread) does not come into play.  Those could be possible solutions to those in disagreement, but I think they are bogus.  There is too much speculation to those kinds of views.

So, therefore, I see these and other verses do make sense in light of other people and races existing before Adam when proper interpretation and common sense is applied.

doug

Gina:
But how do we know that all animals everywhere have no knowledge, or aren't conscious, of God?  Because of the way we see them behave?  Sorry to say but I've known dogs that behaved more humanely in certain ways than some humans. 

I agree it's much too presumptious to say that all animals everywhere aren't aware of God in the slightest.  God's aware of them.  Think of the sparrows.  You know what I'm saying?

And I don't know that God is "consciousness." 

Consciousness is being awake, to know something (anything), being aware.  That's all that consciousness means. 
God's certainly awake and aware, but to say God is "consciousness" begs the question:  Was there ever a time when God was unaware?  Unconscious?  Sleeping??  What woke Him up? 

That's probably silly.  I just like picking on the newbies, I guess.  hehe.  You make me think, Mikiel -- that's for sure and that's become my favorite past-time.

Tah-tah! :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page