Dating Adam

Robert L. Miller (
03 Jun 96 01:55:34 EDT

I like your creation model because it does place Adam as first man. It seems to
me to be the most reasonable reading of scripture. I think you are in conflict
with scripture with your time frame. To require that Adam be created 5.5 mya
just doesn't seem to fit well with the society described in Genesis 4 & 5. In
fact this society sounds strikingly similar to descriptions of the development
of the Sumerian civilization in the Tigis-Euphrates valley between 9000 and 3000
BC. There is physical evidence that the metal working mentioned in Gen 4:22
began in the vicinity of 5000 BC (Science News, V 149, #15, pg 230). If, in
actual fact, Adam was created in the vicinity of 10,000 BC that presents a big
problem with the reconciliation of the flood story and geology. Where are the
flood deposits? There is also the problem with evidence of Homo sapiens back to
40,000 ya, and before that the hominids. Where do they fit into to the model? I
have no answers. My present position is that there are unexplainable differences
between scripture and our present physical descriptions. Because of my encounter
with Jesus Christ and the subsequent transformation of my life I am at ease with
this unexplainable difference. I am simply waiting for new information.
Bob Miller