Dating Adam

Robert L. Miller (
04 Jun 96 02:50:26 EDT

>Bob Miller wrote:

>>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
>> Bob Miller

Glen wrote

>Put yourself in Noah's shoes. If you and 7 of your nearest and dearest
>were the only survivors of our present civilization, how much of today's
>technology would you be able to pass on to your children? I contend that
>you would not be able to re-start today's society. Today's society is
>based upon specialists in various disciplines who support eachother
>economically. I find oil for you, you teach my children for me. But the
>farmer provides food for both of us so that we can engage in our
>respective activities. Without the surplus of food neither you nor I
>would be able to do our thing.

In order for Noah and company to survive for a year provisions would have
had to have been taken on board the Ark. Could they not have taken enough
for 1 year and 4 months?

>In a world with only 8 people left, the most pressing need would be food
>now! They would not be able to wait 4 months for the crop to come in they
>need to go hunting now. Anything you brought with you from the present
>world would quickly become useless. A metal plow will rust and you can't
>make a new one. Books left in the rain will rot so there goes the
>collective knowledge of our society. After the flood, there would have
>been a long dark age in which the people would be quickly reduced to
>savagery. I would not expect that our current conceptions that Noah
>picked up where the pre-flood world left off would even have been possible
>with the technology of 5000 years ago. They were quite advanced 5000
>years ago with a lot of specialists--metal workers, potters, stone masons

>I believe that God taught the original civilization what it needed to know
>but He didn't do that for the descendants of Noah. Thus,there must of
>necessity have been a long, long period of savagery after the flood while
>technology was gradually re-developed.

Where is your evidence?

>We do know that there is at least one gap in the genealogy of Genesis 10
>which I think is a hint to us not to take the genalogies as being too

>Foundation,Fall and Flood

I have read your book, Glen, and I will credit you with creating a very
attractive scenario that is logically consistent but where is the evidence
that links the desparate parts of your story together. You can cite
evidence for a Mediterranean desert 5.5 mya, but what is your evidence
that links that fact to Noah or to the civilization of Gen 4 & 5? That it
could have happened needs evidence to make it believable.

Bob Miller