Genealology of biblical characters

[sniper762]

i do not perceive the flood to have been "worldwide"'

remember, to them, the earth was believed to be flat, hence "worldwide" consisted only of their known domain.

 

[tumbleweed41]

i do not perceive the flood to have been "worldwide"'

remember, to them, the earth was believed to be flat, hence "worldwide" consisted only of their known domain.

But you do believe this....

my belief is that adam was the first "man created in god's image" at the time of the creation story (about 4000 bc).

i dont doubt that their were humans that existed before adam, but they were NOT "created in god's image".

i perceive those civilizations that you posted to have all been destroyed by god BEFORE his assembling of the new earth and introduction of adam around 4000 bc for whatever reason.

the bibllical story tells of the age of THIS dispensation. many times, i believe, did god destroy all of mankind and started over again.

That does not take into account the continuous Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Chinese (among others) civilizations that were around before 4000 BCE and long after.
**************************************
Nor the uninterrupted settlements of Europe and the Americas.

 

[sniper762]

YOU say: continuous i dobt that

 

[tumbleweed41]

YOU say: continuous i dobt that

I say because historians, anthropologists, archaeologists, bioarchaeologists and palaeontologists have gathered evidence that confirm it.

That you choose to doubt them based on purely Biblical evidence is your prerogative, but don't expect anyone with the slightest ability to reason to take your claims seriously.

I find it interesting that in your attempt to mesh your literalistic interpretations of Genesis with known facts, you are willing to discard any scientific evidence that does not conform to your preconceived notions of Adam.

 

[sojourner]

That does not take into account the continuous Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Chinese (among others) civilizations that were around before 4000 BCE and long after.
(BTW, this also discounts any later 'worldwide flood' claims.)
Nor the uninterrupted settlements of Europe and the Americas.

Plus, it's just unfounded, bad theology!

 

[gnostic]

YOU say: continuous i dobt that

Jericho is a perfect example of the town that have been continuously occupied since from earliest Neolithic settlement of 9000 BCE. There was stone walls around the town as early as 3rd quarter of 9th millennium BCE (around 8400 BCE).

This is long before the "supposed" Adam of 4000 BCE.

There are number of Neolithic towns existing before the supposed time of Adam's creation (prior to 4000 BCE). Damascus is of similar age to the Jericho's earliest settlement. Settlement in Byblos has been around since 5000 BCE.

The Neolithic settlement of Athens have been around at the very least 7th millennium BCE. Of course, Athens didn't become important until the Mycenaean period in the mid-2nd millennium BCE.

The fact of the matter is that Adam was not the first man. He wasn't even the first civilised man, since the urban cultures (eg. permanent settlement like town building, agriculture, animal husbandry, pottery) have existed prior to the Bronze Age in Europe, Asia and Africa.

And you have to remember that the early part of the Bible (Torah) didn't exist until 1000 or later.

 

[sniper762]

why do you even suggest that adam was the first man? thats biblical and very nieve for anyone to believe in such nonsence as the bible

 

[tumbleweed41]

my belief is that adam was the first "man created in god's image" at the time of the creation story (about 4000 bc).

i dont doubt that their were humans that existed before adam, but they were NOT "created in god's image".

i perceive those civilizations that you posted to have all been destroyed by god BEFORE his assembling of the new earth and introduction of adam around 4000 bc for whatever reason.

the bibllical story tells of the age of THIS dispensation. many times, i believe, did god destroy all of mankind and started over again.

why do you even suggest that adam was the first man? thats biblical and very nieve for anyone to believe in such nonsence as the bible

Speaking of naivety and nonsense....

 

[gnostic]

why do you even suggest that adam was the first man? thats biblical and very nieve for anyone to believe in such nonsence as the bible

I never believe that he was.

Apart from being a literary invention of creation myth and religious symbol for Abrahamic religions, Adam is not the first anything, historical or otherwise.

You, yourself, believe that Adam was the first, even though there is no indication there was a real Adam.

Your previous post state that:

my belief is that adam was the first "man created in god's image" at the time of the creation story (about 4000 bc).

i dont doubt that their were humans that existed before adam, but they were NOT "created in god's image".

i perceive those civilizations that you posted to have all been destroyed by god BEFORE his assembling of the new earth and introduction of adam around 4000 bc for whatever reason.

the bibllical story tells of the age of THIS dispensation. many times, i believe, did god destroy all of mankind and started over again.

A bold claim, but you can't provide evidence one way or another.

Man have not changed that much anatomically or physiologically with the arrival of this so-called Adam, 4000 BCE.

And you say man was destroyed before the arrival of this new man. Another bold claim, but completely without foundation in reality.

There were no destruction of the older people and formation of new earth 4000 BCE. You perceive, but you're sorely mistaken.

You claim that Adam to be real, but you cannot provide evidences. You even went so far as claiming that he is out original ancestors:

yes herod is offspring of adam. so are you and i

Can you even prove such claims with evidences?

You are not helping yourself in making these claims. You keep redrawing the lines or moving the goalpost. And whenever people ask you to explain and provide a single evidence to back your claim, you tell them to go elsewhere.

If you are going to make claim (as tumbleweed stated - "dish it out"), then you better be able to take criticism if your reasoning is found wanting.

 

[sniper762]

i dont follow you. what are you asking? i think th e whole biblcal adam story to be a myth.

 

[fallingblood]

i dont follow you. what are you asking? i think th e whole biblcal adam story to be a myth.

Then why believe Adam existed at all? It is only that mythical story that Adam is mentioned.

 

[sniper762]

seems like you copied my post i dont follow you. what are you asking? i think the whole biblcal adam story to be a myth.

 

[gnostic]

i dont follow you. what are you asking? i think th e whole biblcal adam story to be a myth.

And yet you said:

yes herod is offspring of adam. so are you and i

Then why you think we are all offspring of Adam, if you think he is mythological?

You went on to say that Adam was the first man created in God's image, and that previous civilisations were destroyed with the introduction of Adam into this world.

Why are you making one unsubstantiated claim after another, if you believe to by mythical?

You are the one who keep contradicting yourself.

 

[sniper762]

me? contradicting? no im an offspring of a monkey

adam was a monkey and if he WAS created in god's image, then he would be a monkey too, right?

 

[sojourner]

And the trap is sprung. Another pitiful attempt at deception.

 

[Skwim]

And the trap is sprung. Another pitiful attempt at deception.

Me thinks it's more a case of one part of the brain not paying attention to what the other part is saying.

 

[sniper762]

i had to DUMB it down a bit for some to be able to debate with me. shall i go lower?

 

[Skwim]

i had to DUMB it down a bit for some to be able to debate with me. shall i go lower?

I don't believe that's possible. I think it's about as dumb as it could get.

 

[tumbleweed41]

i had to DUMB it down a bit for some to be able to debate with me. shall i go lower?

Nice attempt at a dodge, but lets see what you have stated so far, shall we?

adam's existence is only biblical,

I think we can all agree on that.

however his genealogy of his offspring, such as king david, solomon even up to king herod in the nt is substanciated by historical evidence as well as recorded in the bible.

His genealogy? Who's? Adams? What historical evidence?

are you implying that bible believing christians believe the creation of adam to be allegoric?
i am one of the above AND a theistic evolutionist
i dont find the bible to be allegoric and i also believe in toe.

You do not find the Creation story to be allegoric? An extended metaphor? A fable? A myth?

you say: So while your study leads you to believe Adam was created (or existed) 6000 years ago, others who study the Bible come to the conclusion that the story of Adam, in fact the entire creation story, is allegorical and contains no historic, biological, geological or cosmological literalistic facts.

tumbleweed, please site these people, if they are truly bible studiers, not critics

Again, you cite disbelief that true Biblical scholars can find the story of Adam and the Creation story allegorical. An extended metaphor. A fable. A myth.

yes herod is offspring of adam. so are you and i

Citing the historical reality of Adam.

my belief is that adam was the first "man created in god's image" at the time of the creation story (about 4000 bc).

Again, stating that Adam was the first man "Created in God's image".

i dont doubt that their were humans that existed before adam, but they were NOT "created in god's image".

Citing Adams existence again as the first man "Created in God's image", while stating that all other humans were not.

i perceive those civilizations that you posted to have all been destroyed by god BEFORE his assembling of the new earth and introduction of adam around 4000 bc for whatever reason.

the bibllical story tells of the age of THIS dispensation. many times, i believe, did god destroy all of mankind and started over again.

Here you state that all of humankind that existed prior to Adam were destroyed by God. Ignoring all evidence to the contrary. While repeatedly stating the historical reality of Adam.

i dont follow you. what are you asking? i think th e whole biblcal adam story to be a myth.

WHAT? A MYTH? A fable? An extended metaphor? Allegorical?

me? contradicting?

Yes. For all to see.:yes:

 

[tumbleweed41]

Tumbleweed, your so gullable.............i got in yo head

Pathetic

Are you admitting to trolling?