Re: Old Adam
David Campbell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Wed, 2 Jul 1997 15:37:42 -0400
The idea of Adam as one among many existing humans has been argued for
several hundred years. Sidney (1866, Conversations on the Bible and
Science. Jarrold and Sons, London) cites a 1656 book titled "A Discourse
Upon the Twelfth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Verses of the Fifth Chapter of
the Epistle of Paul to the Romans, by which are Prov'd that the First Men
were Created before Adam". Obviously, if Jesus can be a second Adam,
"adamness" is not strictly connected to physical ancestry of people.
>How would you tie in a "recent" Adam to the geological record of the
>flood. Based on a thread a month or so ago, the best evidence for the
>flood was 500K YA (I think that was the time period) -- or would a 600K
>YO Adam fit your "recent" definition?
Actually, the flood in question (filling of the Mediterranean) was 5,000
KYA. Some flooding would have been involved with glacial retreats through
the Pleistocene, but none obviously fast enough to catch anyone. If
pre-Flood humans were confined to a relatively small region, then many
local events are possibilities.