1. Hello Guest! You are browsing the forums as a guest; you will have limited permissions as a guest so we advise registering to enjoy the forums fully. Remember: we are a Christian ONLY site - any user who is not Christian will not be approved. Blessings, Christian Forum Site Staff
    Dismiss Notice

Did God Create More People Than Just Adam And Eve?

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by Tainted Scrolls, Jul 27, 2013.

  1. So I grew up in a non denominational church and that is still what I consider my faith to be...I don't know if this question falls under our beliefs but I like to ask the question anyway. I run a youtube show but do not get a lot of hits and this is why I bring it here.

    PLEASE keep in mind that I am breaking everything down on a chapter by chapter basis, I did not take into account anything that was written after GEN ch.2 and these videos are not posted to be FACT, they are posted to bring up questions.

    These are a few points I went over.

    So what do you guys think? You can discuss it here or on the youtube comments either way is fine with me.
  2. Spent some time as well reading regarding the old-chromosomal adam : )

    ... realized time is more worth spent on reading the teachings of the new adam : )
    Rusty likes this.
  3. It is my understanding that Genesis 1 is like a broad view of creation and chapter 2 is a more detailed account. This style was typical in the time period and for Moses Egyptian education.

    Now there many studies done on genetics that imply both sides of the origin of man. So discerning the truth from them is extremely difficult. I will attempt to find a study I read years ago that actually showed the high probability of DNA degeneration from the point of origin.

    It was hypothesized that ALL races could have potentially come from the same DNA strain and as certain genes are breed out, they are no longer available. In other words-once a piece of the code was lost-it doesn't come back; unlike what evolutionary theory predicts. So what does that mean for us?

    In theory-looking at the information from a faith based perspective- that means Adam & Eve contained all the genes in their DNA to create different colors and features of the human body. At the same time-certain provable adaptions occurred. Often when you debate an evolutionist you end up debating 'adaptions' as 'evolution proof' which simply is not true.

    See-evolution is a faith-though they will not admit it. You have to BELIEVE that evolution happened and they base their faith on observable adaptions. EXAMPLE: The birds with different beak sizes on the Galapagos islands. Different birds had different sized beaks depending upon environmental variable of where they lived on the island like: water availability and different food sources like nuts versus worms. This adaption only proved that their bodies were designed to ADAPT. It doesn't prove that birds grew out of a pile of "ooze", turned into a fish, then an amphibian and then a bird. It just shows the bird beaks change with the environment. This applies with humans as well.

    So with this knowledge, we can see that every animal (and humans) had an original 'kind' (species) source for it's DNA. Once the DNA lost a certain gene trait in a certain individual -it was lost-never to return. So we have all sorts of canine 'kind' from the probable 'wolf kind' that was aboard the ark. Through species adaptation to the environments of the earth, different 'dogs' emerged and lost that code in their DNA. We see this all the time especially with inbreeding. Inbreed individuals degenerate-this is why many 'pure breeds' are disease ridden. There bodies can no longer cope with all the environmental diversity.

    The earth is 'breaking down'; not building up like evolution tries to prove. Why do you think the elites are so concerned with medical research to extend their lives with organ transplants, chemicals and 'bio-machinery'? They know the truth of evolution-it's bogus! But they teach our kids in school that humans are a 'virus' to the earth. Straight up creation worship=anti-creator worship.
    Major and Tainted Scrolls say Amen and like this.
  4. Addressing the question of the title...

    "...he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth..." (Acts 17:26)

    There is a theory that Genesis was compiled by Moses from accounts already written (http://www.trueorigin.org/tablet.asp). In other words, Noah wrote some of the book, Isaac wrote some of the book, etc.

    One of the points about this theory is the use of colophons in Genesis: the book is divided up into sections that begin or end with "These are the generations of..." (i.e. Genesis 2:4, 5:1, 6:9, etc.). Chapter 1 is one account dealing with the creation of the earth in general. Chapter 2:5 begins a different account dealing with the creation of man.

    Personally, I like the theory, but I don't know if it is true.
  5. First and foremost, welcome. As has already been alluded to, science has already proven that all of mankind is descended from one woman and because the male DNA is, I've been told, more difficult to trace back this far, I will presume they are currently working on that. This one absolute truth dismisses the ideas that God, in the beginning, created more than two people. I have not tried to keep up with sources but a good Google search should provide you the sources of this.
  6. Thank you guys for joining this discussion and understand that I am just trying to grasp more knowlege on a chapter by chapter basis but all of you have been very informative and given me some more things to look up and study.
  7. Ok taking all that into consideration, I heard two other theories from other people since I have brought this subject up.

    1)The creation of man was just a metaphor for the fall of man. God saw the earth and it was good(wholesome, perfect, without sin) God created Man...Man Brings sin into the world so on and so forth.

    And this one I heard from a Jewish man...I am not sure if this is a common Jewish belief or just his but...
    2)Eden was a sub type world and was not a physical place here on earth. There was people already here on earth and God created Eve with the intent to cast them to earth to spread the message of God (Save the people of earth) and when he told them not to touch the tree it was more of a "dont you touch that tree guys" with full intent of having them eat of the tree.
  8. Matthew 21:

    33 Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country: 34 And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it. 35 And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. 36 Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise. 37 But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. 38 But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. 39 And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him. 40 When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? 41 They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons. 42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? 43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. 44 And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. 45 And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. 46 But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet.

    Luke 3:

    23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, 24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph, 25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge, 26 Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda, 27 Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri, 28 Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er, 29 Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, 30 Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim, 31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David, 32 Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson, 33 Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda, 34 Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor, 35 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala, 36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech, 37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, 38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
  9. I kinda understand where you are going with the Luke 3 but I am not sure what the Matthew 21 has to do with it?

    Also I don't think that Luke 3 really changes the second theroy that the Jewish man had said. It seems as if those could still go hand in hand.
  10. On faith-I take the Bible as truth; Luke shows a genealogy of Jesus Christ from Adam. If the Bible is truth (which I believe it is) then our faith dictates that 'Adam' was a man -the man, a 'son of God' in flesh.

    Then you must also account for the shift from the pre to post flood eras. On faith, we are all descendants of Noah. Now considering there were 7 other individuals on the ark, there is room for debate about the gene pool. But none the less On faith-Adam through Christ is a single lineage.

    Matthew 21 is a parable about creation and the choosing of the Hebrews-which would become the 'Jews'- to be the 'stewards of the earth. Now we could whittle this down and say it is post flood era creation of the 'Promised Land -to become the original Israel-not the modern day Israel. The 'new stewards' are Christians. God builds on the foundation he lays-that includes the original creation and the covenants he made with the Hebrews. So trying to discern the full capacity of Genesis 3:24 is a difficult task.

    The Tree of Life is still waiting for us:

    Revelation 21:1
    And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
    2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

    Revelation 22:2
    In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

    It is my speculation that the 'new' either resembles the place Adam got kicked out of or IS the place Adam got kicked out of. I am thinking that this 'tree of life' is the same as the one in Genesis 3:22 & 24.

    And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

    Therefore with a few other scriptures I have 'theory' if you will: The Garden and the Tree are still there; but there is a 'veil' between us and the Garden until the 'time' when the old heaven and earth pass away. We are 'blinded' to it-for now. I am sure this will stir the pot a touch....(Numbers 22:31, 2 Kings 6:17, Daniel 9:21, Revelation 4:1-2)

    It seems to me to have 'other types of humans' on the planet would make for a great elitist through blood argument (liked saved because we are a chosen people by bloodline-sound familiar?); but since Christ came to break that thinking with the Jews-I find it hard to believe that he would start the foundation of in the same manner. Especially when you consider that God 'saved' the Hebrews out of oppression and enslavement. If he wanted elitist bloodlines-He would have made the Egyptians His chosen people.
    Major and Tainted Scrolls say Amen and like this.
  11. I heard other theories or “new teachings” that can still go hand in hand with traditonal teachings.

    Although doing so, IMO, will waste some good wine : )

    New Wine into Old Wineskins
    Matthew 9:14-17, Mark 2:21-22 and Luke 5:33-39
  12. Please explain your point further aha if you don't mind
  13. #13 aha, Jul 30, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2013
    Sorry, I think that post is for a General Discussion, and not in a Bible Study.
    I quoted the verses not to explain those verses itself in that situation...

    Disclaimer : )
    I am no bible teacher at all … Teachers will be held more accountable ….

    I love to quote biblical verses applying to day to day situations, the concept or the practicality is there, but it has nothing to do with the intent of the original bible verse….

    Ok. to clarify:
    what I meant is that there are new teachings: that can still go hand in hand with say: the saving grace thru Jesus Christ….

    Say, incarnation: it is absurd to us Christians, isn’t it?

    But there are some “new teachings” that there is reincarnation, that it just keeps on repeating (with biblical verses huh..) until the person realized or was made to realize the saving grace thru Jesus Christ….

    See? it still goes hand in hand… although I personally have no problem with those who believe in that, but it remains absurd to me….. but if it will be a new gospel, new Christ they are teaching, then it will be a different story : )

    I mentioned the new wine into old wineskin, which I also apply in secular work I have:

    If there already an entrenched culture in the workplace, and there is a new, revolutionary or maybe controversial ideas:
    ....you do not apply it immediately: there will be little by little adjustment…
    .....or you apply it wholly to a fresh group with no entrenched culture yet
    .... or not apply at all

    If the NEW ideas will be applied immediately to OLD culture, there will be a waste: of time, of resources, of emotions/ energy.
  14. Fantastic point
  15. I would be extremely careful thinking on "new ideas" since they tend to be directly related to "new age" ideas. We must remember that God is the same today, as He was yesterday and as He will be. We need to be cautious and maintain the integrity of the scriptures. And if God ordained a "culture" who are we to change it? The Church is called to be steadfast in the Word-not the vain imaginations of men. Use the Spirit of Discernment....
    Major likes this.
  16. Tainted Scrolls,
    Three times in the Bible we are told by God to neither add to nor to subtract from the scriptures because the penalty is eternal. I say this for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the lack of reverence in the handling of God's Word today. If any man gives you anything to consider about Biblical Theology, the first thing out of the wise man's mouth is the request for the address of the passage or the passages that teach this message. Your Jewish friend will not be able to provide you with the required address because such an idea is out of the mouth of a man or a woman, certainly not from God.

    Now, there are two types of Jew for our purpose here, the Jewish Believer and the Jewish Non-Believer. The terms should be Jewish Hebrew and Hebrew but many are the Hebrews that wear the name Jew like some sort of invisible badge even though many of them are Atheists. At this point I will add a third group of Hebrew persons, the Completed Jew. If you ever want to dig into the ancient beliefs of the Jewish Believer, search out one of these Completed Jews. They are led by a Christian Rabbi and are completely Jewish and completely Christian.

    I've heard these assertions before and one you have not mentioned here that deals with the first two verses of Genesis 1. It is known as the Gap Theory and I ran it to ground about 22 years ago but there are still many that buy into it. It is a strong case of adding what is not there to the scriptures and that is why I'm not going to explain it here, you'll need to look elsewhere for it's teaching because I am one of those Bible Teachers that fall under the stricter judgment. The three occasions already mentioned, one in the Mosaic Law, one in the Revelation of Jesus, the Christ and the other I forget are the debunking of the theory because to make the case for it, it must all be done from the outside of scripture and thus, it seeks to add to what God has preserved for us.
    Major likes this.
  17. Welcome to the web site "TS". It is always great to see new, young blood wanting to get out the Word of God. To answer your question, I suggest that we look at the Word for context.

    This question, "Did God create other peoples", only comes up because of Genesis 4:16-17.............

    "And Cain went out from the preseance of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden.
    And Cain knew his wife and she conceived and bare Enoch".

    Then the question must be...........Where did his wife come from????

    Since there is no mention or hint anywhere in the Scriptures of God creating more humans other than Adam and Eve, it is then correct to understand that Adam and Eve had more children because that is what God told them to do........
    "Go forth and multiply".......they did exactly that.

    Therefore Cain married one of his sisters, nieces, cousins etc. There were no problems then with mutant genes so problems with childbirth would not apply.
  18. It is always good to read your enlightening word Bill.
  19. #19 Brother_Mike_V, Aug 5, 2013
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2013
    We had a sermon this morning that reminded me of this thread-basically it came down to consistency: in a nutshell it was 'taking advice from elders' and 'not removing landmarks' / changing doctrines to suite the 'times'/ 'culture'. My guess is that's how the pre-flood folks ended up in the drink....

    They were far removed from God:

    Romans 1:
    19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
    20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
    21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
    22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
    23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
    24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
    25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
    26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
    27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
    28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
    29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
    30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
    31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
    32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
    Major and KingJ say Amen and like this.
  20. #20 aha, Aug 5, 2013
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2013
    Yes, we need to be careful that “new ideas” are not “new age” teachings… even those with bible quotes…

    In the Temptation of Christ: our Lord says at first “it is written”, on the next try the devil used as well “ for it is written”….

    Matthew 4:1-11
    Jesus Is Tested in the Wilderness

    4 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted[a] by the devil. 2 After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”
    4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’[
    5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 6 “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:
    “‘He will command his angels concerning you,
    and they will lift you up in their hands,
    so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’[
    7 Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’[
    8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”
    10 Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’[
    11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

Share This Page