Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People sometimes try to discredit the Holy Bible by picking the story of Cain's wife as an example of a writing flaw. Where did she come from? 1 Corinthians 15:45 says "And so it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being..." However, in 1938Pierre Teihard de Chardan wrote (translated) The Phenomenon of Man suggesting that human life may have been created at several places simultaneously, which would explain different races, and where Cain's wife came from. Adam was the first, but God also "created" humans all over the world, and they procreated as they met each other later, which would avoid inbreeding. I find this very profound. Any thoughts?
Obviously there were other people. The fossil record shows this as it shows that people did not originate in the Middle East and that there were other species before ours showed up. It also shows our species is at least 150000 -250000 years old not 6000. And on and on.
But the bible doesn't say so and immediately contradicts itself. This is just another attempt at trying to justify the inconsistencies with made up additions. You can't have it both ways.
People sometimes try to discredit the Holy Bible by picking the story of Cain's wife as an example of a writing flaw. Where did she come from? 1 Corinthians 15:45 says "And so it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being..." However, in 1938Pierre Teihard de Chardan wrote (translated) The Phenomenon of Man suggesting that human life may have been created at several places simultaneously, which would explain different races, and where Cain's wife came from. Adam was the first, but God also "created" humans all over the world, and they procreated as they met each other later, which would avoid inbreeding. I find this very profound. Any thoughts?
The bible is quite clear that Adam was the first man....in one of the Gospels Jesus' ancestry is traced back to "Adam, son of God". Cain's wife was simply his one of his many sisters...human beings were created perfect and although Adam passed on sickness and death through his disobedience to God, they were still very much able to procreate without any of the inherent problems that gradually came and which we find today. Jesus is also called "the last Adam" as it was his perfect life (that Adam and Eve once had) that was given as a ransome for al people. I recommend Answers in Genisis....a website that will throw clear light on many questions along this line and others...
While Pierre Teihard de Chardan wrote quite a few fascinating books, and I have read more than one, do you consider him an expert on biblical interpretation?
The bible is quite clear that Adam was the first man....in one of the Gospels Jesus' ancestry is traced back to "Adam, son of God". Cain's wife was simply his one of his many sisters...human beings were created perfect and although Adam passed on sickness and death through his disobedience to God, they were still very much able to procreate without any of the inherent problems that gradually came and which we find today. Jesus is also called "the last Adam" as it was his perfect life (that Adam and Eve once had) that was given as a ransome for al people. I recommend Answers in Genisis....a website that will throw clear light on many questions along this line and others...
There's no way in the world that I could come to believe that a full grown man was created out of dust and then lived to be over 900 years old and his wife was made out of part of his rib cage. Then add to that the extended family apparently creates the human race by incest between brothers and sisters. I know that many of my friends here believe that to be the case but I just can't accept such a story as being factual.
There's no way in the world that I could come to believe that a full grown man was created out of dust and then lived to be over 900 years old and his wife was made out of part of his rib cage. Then add to that the extended family apparently creates the human race by incest between brothers and sisters. I know that many of my friends here believe that to be the case but I just can't accept such a story as being factual.
There's no way in the world that I could come to believe that a full grown man was created out of dust and then lived to be over 900 years old and his wife was made out of part of his rib cage.
Obviously there were other people. The fossil record shows this as it shows that people did not originate in the Middle East and that there were other species before ours showed up. It also shows our species is at least 150000 -250000 years old not 6000. And on and on.
But the bible doesn't say so and immediately contradicts itself. This is just another attempt at trying to justify the inconsistencies with made up additions. You can't have it both ways.
Carbon dating: used to date plants, animals, and humans...is only able to measure subjects 5700 yrs or younger +or -, so how can you say that humans were here hundreds of thousands of yrs. ago?
godspeed,
freedom
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I simply consider Adam to be the a-priori male and Lilith the a-priori female.
