Were Adam and Eve the first people?

[billvon]

How could they have been the first people, when the bible informs that God created mankind in the same day Adam was created?

Here's an example:

"Powered airplanes were invented in 1903. On December 17, 1903, the Wright brothers flew at Kitty Hawk with the first powered aircraft. Their aircraft, the Flyer, made four brief flights, taking off from level ground, gaining altitude, then landing some distance away under control."

Rational person's interpretation - the Wright Flyer was the first true airplane, and other airplanes came later.

Jan's interpretation - The Wright Flyer was invented at the same time as the 747. It's the only possible interpretation of that statement, since it says "powered airplanes were invented in 1903" and the 747 is a powered airplane.

Which is yet another reason no one takes you seriously.

 

[Jan Ardena]

All we have to go on is the text. You have not given any textual backing to your position.

Gen 5
Adam begat Seth
Seth begat Enos
Enos begat Cainan
Cainan begat Mahalaleel
Mahalaleel begat Jared
Jared begat Enoch
Enoch begat Methuselah
Methuselah begat Lamech
Lamech begat Noah
Noah begat Shem, Ham and Japheth

Then everyone except Noah, his sons and their wives dies. (EDIT: Enoch too was spared because God "took him")

Gen 7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

What part of the text supports your point of view?

God created man on the sixth day.
He also created Adam. But the difference was that Adam was specially created. God breathed the breath of life into Adams nostril, and he became a living soul. We can assume that the descendants of Adam had, in their nostril, the breath of life, based on the verse in question...

Gen 7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

The sixth day creation did not include the breath of life. Another thing to notice was that God said . Let US make man in OUR image.

I think those of Adam’s seed, which were contaminated, died. It appears only Noah was the only righteous one left, hence he was spared.

Jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Which is yet another reason no one takes you seriously.

It’s a very simple question bilvon.
Now try your best to answer it.
Here it is again.

How could they have been the first people, when the bible informs that God created mankind in the same day Adam was created?

Jan.

 

[Acitnoids]

God created man on the sixth day.
He also created Adam. But the difference was that Adam was specially created. God breathed the breath of life into Adams nostril, and he became a living soul. We can assume that the descendants of Adam had, in their nostril, the breath of life, based on the verse in question...

Gen 7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

The sixth day creation did not include the breath of life. Another thing to notice was that God said . Let US make man in OUR image.

I think those of Adam’s seed, which were contaminated, died. It appears only Noah was the only righteous one left, hence he was spared.

Jan.

I'll give you a chance to edit that post before I reply.

 

[sweetpea]

How could they have been the first people, when the bible informs that God created mankind in the same day Adam was created?

Jan, can you give a link to a bible stating it that way? I'm not saying you can't, I just want to know what bible you personally like to reference.

 

[Michael 345]

Here's an example:

"Powered airplanes were invented in 1903. On December 17, 1903, the Wright brothers flew at Kitty Hawk with the first powered aircraft. Their aircraft, the Flyer, made four brief flights, taking off from level ground, gaining altitude, then landing some distance away under control."

Rational person's interpretation - the Wright Flyer was the first true airplane, and other airplanes came later.

Jan's interpretation - The Wright Flyer was invented at the same time as the 747. It's the only possible interpretation of that statement, since it says "powered airplanes were invented in 1903" and the 747 is a powered airplane.

Which is yet another reason no one takes you seriously.

I posted much the same sort of idea but in my post it was to demonstrate evolution

The gradual increase in complexity from Flyer to 747 shows how evolution works

I really like your version because I have Jan on Iggy it gives me some small insight into his scrambled brain

Do you think the Wright brothers had the 747 behind the shed as a backup?

 

[iceaura]

I think those of Adam’s seed, which were contaminated, died. It appears only Noah was the only righteous one left, hence he was spared.

And so the rest of humanity, all the living people now, were - as the story has it - descendants of Adam and Eve.

We good to go, then? All cleared up?

 

[billvon]

It’s a very simple question bilvon.
Now try your best to answer it.
Here it is again.

Asked and answered.

 

[Dinosaur]

Most of the stories in the old testaments are myths. The Adam & Eve story is a case in point.

This story indicates that Homo Sapiens did not evolve from earlier primates.​

There are a series of fossils clearly indicating the evolution of Homo Sapiens from earlier primates. Similarly there are other series of fossils indicating the evolution of other modern animals.

One example is a set of fossils starting with Eohippus & ending with the modern horse.​

Believers in a strict interpretation of the bible must deny that Homo Sapiens evolved from earlier primates. I wonder if they deny the concept of evolution for other animals.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Most of the stories in the old testaments are myths. The Adam & Eve story is a case in point.

This story indicates that Homo Sapiens did not evolve from earlier primates.​

There are a series of fossils clearly indicating the evolution of Homo Sapiens from earlier primates. Similarly there are other series of fossils indicating the evolution of other modern animals.

One example is a set of fossils starting with Eohippus & ending with the modern horse.​

Believers in a strict interpretation of the bible must deny that Homo Sapiens evolved from earlier primates. I wonder if they deny the concept of evolution for other animals.

This is just another religion Dinosaur.
One that enables, and maintains your denial and rejection of the God that you know exists.

Have a nice day Dinosaur!

Jan.

 

[sculptor]

Most of the stories in the old testaments are myths. ...

I would suggest that most of the biblical stories are to be taken as metaphor. There is much of the "morality play" in them.
Perhaps? Except for the battle plans---There seems to be value in understanding the tactics and strategy of the combatants.

The fragment posted in #178 is claimed to be 12000 years old and is(much like the book of Job) only partially translatable.
(in my own short life, I have seen the meanings of many words changing)
The translators of the fragment claim that the fragment contains your standard (thou shalt and thou shalt nots).
I suspect that translators tend to be biased by what they expect the document to read and therefore remain skeptical of their claims.

 

[exchemist]

This is rather good. I don't normally follow the evasions and game-playing of Ardena, but I see you guys have, over the last two years or so, managed to smoke him out at last as some kind of biblical literalist. Well done!

 

[origin]

One that enables, and maintains your denial and rejection of the God that you know exists.

I seriously think the vast majority of you religious types do not really believe a God exists or at least have some major doubts. If you really really believed in God then you would not be overly concerned about death. I say most of you because some do show a real belief; like the lunatics that flew planes into the towers on 9/11, but hey, they were lunatics! If someone you cared about died it should be a goddamn celebration since their existence would be transformed from the difficult life of a human to the paradise of a heavenly being.

Most of you guys talk a good game but I tend to look at evidence and the evidence says most of you fear your death or that of a loved one. I know you want to believe and try very hard to believe but your actions indicate that you have serious doubts....

 

[Jan Ardena]

seriously think the vast majority of you religious types do not really believe a God exists or at least have some major doubts. If you really really believed in God then you would not be overly concerned about death.

How is not being overly concerned about death,
related to being a theist, or not?

I say most of you because some do show a real belief; like the lunatics that flew planes into the towers on 9/11, but hey, they were lunatics!

Interesting!
Your method of maintaining your delusion is to tell yourself that theism is lunacy, and the only way to truly express it, is to do something like fly planes into buildings.

If someone you cared about died it should be a goddamn celebration since their existence would be transformed from the difficult life of a human to the paradise of a heavenly being.

I don’t even know where to begin, with this statement, other than to say that it smacks of anger and frustration.
You deny and reject God, but know there is a God. It must kill you knowing this, but having to pretend you don’t.

Most of you guys talk a good game but I tend to look at evidence and the evidence says most of you fear your death or that of a loved one.

Last time I checked, a theist is simply a person that accepts, and believe in, God.

Are you saying that atheists do not fear their own death, or the death of a loved one? And this is what makes the difference between the psychology of theists and atheists?

Jan.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

I don’t even know where to begin, with this statement, other than to say that it smacks of anger and frustration.

Projection maybe?

You deny and reject God, but know there is a God. It must kill you knowing this, but having to pretend you don’t.

You're sounding almost neurotic.

 

[sculptor]

... If someone you cared about died it should be a goddamn celebration since their existence would be transformed from the difficult life of a human to the paradise of a heavenly being.
...

I have met such people.
One of the jobs I volunteered for in the army was the planting of the dead guys.
One fine day, I found myself, after several switchbacks on narrow winding West Virginia mountain roads, among a community that seemed genuinely happy that their brother/son/lover/cousin/etc...was dead. This was circa '69-'70. Their hearse was a grey 57 cadillac that had obviously been used to haul hay when not needed for the deadsters. (there was still a lot of stray hay in the back).

After the planting, one of them approached me and asked that we attend the celebratory feast in the deadsters honor.
It was one happy and filling feast with moonshine(which I forbade the bus driver---I asked for a pint jar for him that he could have and share after the driving was done). The people of the community took turns standing and sharing a memory of the dead guy.

OK
They were happy, and content (can any of us expect anything more?)
And their joy made us happy for awhile.
I would not choose to piss on their celebration.
It seemed that sharing in the joy of death was also sharing in the joy of life.

 

[origin]

How is not being overly concerned about death,
related to being a theist, or not?

The majority of the religions promise an unimaginably wonderful existence that last for an eternity after death. Most atheists assume death is death. I would certainly assume a theistic person would have a much less negative outlook on death considering nothing but wonderful stuff happens when you die. It stands to reason.

Interesting!
Your method of maintaining your delusion is to tell yourself that theism is lunacy, and the only way to truly express it, is to do something like fly planes into buildings.

No I was bringing up the point that someone who flies a plane into a building full well knowing they will die, must certainly have an unshakable belief that they will be in paradise after death.
The lunacy comment was a dig at religion that was not really necessary and distracted from my point. Bad form on my part. Please ignore that comment.

I don’t even know where to begin, with this statement, other than to say that it smacks of anger and frustration.

I suppose I do have anger and frustration over death - especially the senseless death we see every day.

You deny and reject God, but know there is a God. It must kill you knowing this, but having to pretend you don’t.

You claim to believe in God, but know there is no God. It must kill you knowing this, but having to pretend you do.

Last time I checked, a theist is simply a person that accepts, and believe in, God.

It is still true. I am linking belief in God with belief in an afterlife. That is the reason that I used the adjective most in my original post. Not all people who believe in God believe in an afterlife.

Are you saying that atheists do not fear their own death, or the death of a loved one?

I am saying they certainly shouldn't. For instance if I honestly believed that upon my parents death they would be starting an eternity of bliss in paradise - why would I be sad?

And this is what makes the difference between the psychology of theists and atheists?

I don't think it says anything about anyone's psychology.

 

[origin]

I have met such people.
One of the jobs I volunteered for in the army was the planting of the dead guys.
One fine day, I found myself, after several switchbacks on narrow winding West Virginia mountain roads, among a community that seemed genuinely happy that their brother/son/lover/cousin/etc...was dead. This was circa '69-'70. Their hearse was a grey 57 cadillac that had obviously been used to haul hay when not needed for the deadsters. (there was still a lot of stray hay in the back).

After the planting, one of them approached me and asked that we attend the celebratory feast in the deadsters honor.
It was one happy and filling feast with moonshine(which I forbade the bus driver---I asked for a pint jar for him that he could have and share after the driving was done). The people of the community took turns standing and sharing a memory of the dead guy.

OK
They were happy, and content (can any of us expect anything more?)
And their joy made us happy for awhile.
I would not choose to piss on their celebration.
It seemed that sharing in the joy of death was also sharing in the joy of life.

They sound like true believers. And as I said they do exist but they are few and far between.

 

[iceaura]

Last time I checked, a theist is simply a person that accepts, and believe in, God.

But not the overt Abrahamic theists who post here. They present a far more complicated set of psychological attributes, at the same time as they present a far less simple set of criteria for theistic belief. For example, on this thread they claim the Bible contains information about God's physical, nonmetaphorical, involvement in the physical origins of human beings, and regard those who object to such claims as in some way denying deity itself - as having or speaking from an atheistic point of view.

The entire question of whether Adam and Eve were the "first people" does not even arise, there is no such question in any realistic or nonmetaphorical sense, outside of their insistence.

And so on this thread simple theism - and ipso facto atheism - is irrelevant. Only the oA school is involved.

 

[Jan Ardena]

The majority of the religions promise an unimaginably wonderful existence that last for an eternity after death.

Religion can be anything.
Darwinists believe that there is nothing after the death of the body. How is that any less wonderful than people who believe they get laid in paradise?

But we’re not talking about religion, we’re talking about theism, which is simply, an acceptance and belief in God. Can you comprehend the difference?

Most atheists assume death is death. I would certainly assume a theistic person would have a much less negative outlook on death considering nothing but wonderful stuff happens when you die. It stands to reason.

Why? If that is what we both assume?

I was bringing up the point that someone who flies a plane into a building full well knowing they will die, must certainly have an unshakable belief that they will be in paradise after death.

To perform such a task could easily be just as inviting if the person knew there was absolutely nothing after death. It depends on the individual in question.
Not everyone (if anyone) who commits suicide, does so because they believe they are going to paradise.

Mental illness
Traumatic Experience
Bullying
Personality Disorders
Drug Addiction
Substance Abuse
Eating disorder...

...are just a few reasons why people decide to kill themselves.
I think you’re dangerously simplifying suicide, by blaming it on belief in God. Then again we have witnessed how atheists will deny, reject, and lie, to defend their delusion, just in this thread alone.

You claim to believe in God, but know there is no God. It must kill you knowing this, but having to pretend you do.

If I “know” anything at all, then there is a God, irrespective of my claim to belief.
Your worldview cannot account for knowledge. It cannot account for anything without borrowing from my worldview.
Your world view is simply an idea, that relies on God for it to take shape. It has nothing, and it is nothing. It is a good thing that you are only a pretender.

am linking belief in God with belief in an afterlife. That is the reason that I used the adjective most in my original post. Not all people who believe in God believe in an afterlife.

Because you know there is a God. That is why.
What do those theists that do not believe in an afterlife, believe will happen after they give up this mortal body?

For instance if I honestly believed that upon my parents death they would be starting an eternity of bliss in paradise - why would I be sad?

Cause you will miss them, ya nutty psycho!
Of course I’m kidding, with the name calling.
But it is true that we naturally grieve when our loved ones die.

But according to your worldview, you would be correct in asking that question.

Jan.