Re: Antiquity and Unity of the Human Race

From: Dick Fischer (
Date: Sat May 04 2002 - 00:07:30 EDT

  • Next message: Dick Fischer: "Re: 2900 BC vs. 2350 BC"

    Hi Mike, you wrote:

    >Gordon wrote: Genesis 2:23 uses both 'adam and 'ish to refer to the same
    >I would very much like to see you deal more directly with this one verse. It
    >seems to me that, since it uses both the words 'adam and 'ish to refer to the
    >man Adam, it disproves your contention that the writers of the Hebrew
    >scriptures used 'adam to refer to the man Adam and his descendants and used
    >the word 'ish to refer to those outside the line of Adam.
    >Your response to Gordon seems to have talked all around his point without
    >really addressing it.

    I posted this to you on April 20th when you and I were discussing
    this off line.

    Here it is again:

      If you start mixing up 'adam and 'ish you lose it all. There are two instances
    which are rules unto themselves. Man and woman, or man and wife, is always
    'ish and 'ishah. Probably because it rhymes nicely. Man in conjunction with
    animals is always 'adam.

    Otherwise, those in direct descent from Adam are 'adam or bene 'adam,
    never 'ish. I don't know any exceptions to that.

    Yours in Christ,

    Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution -
    "The answer we should have known about 150 years ago"

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 04 2002 - 01:01:13 EDT