Re: How to interpret Adam

From: Dick Fischer <>
Date: Fri Feb 27 2004 - 19:46:08 EST

Jack wrote:

>LOL, my last comment that you mentioned is based on my understanding of
>the Bible alone, what other evidence is needed?
>Actually Dick I was just reading your article on the asa website, on the
>search for the historic Adam. And I am in agreement with you for most of
>what you say, and will use it a reference for data and evidence. I have
>long thought that the evidence of the first agricultural communities
>probably coorelated with Adam's time.
>I even agree with you about the nephilim, and I think that the "genuine
>humans" the adamites if you will, and the "others" the preadamites,
>probably coexisted and interbred up until the time of Noah. And, in fact,
>this interbreeding was one of the reason that the flood occured. Now, I
>know you will claim that there is no evidence that there was worldwide
>flood, and that it was regional only. But, I think it is clear, from
>biblical evidence alone, that something worldwide and significant happened
>during Noah's time, and Noahs descendants, then repopulated the Earth, and
>the "others" were no more, at least that is how I see it. It is possible
>I suppose that the interbreeding up until that time, was enough to account
>for the genetic variation we see today. I think this is more acceptable
>than the idea that some of current peoples are descendants of the "others"

This is exactly what I thought in 1986 when the Washington Post published
my article, and I promptly got the left foot of fellowship from McLean
Bible Church. Undaunted, and buoyed with sudden, unearned literary
success, I launched headlong into Christian apologetics. About five years
later, I hit a brick wall of stark reality. Not only does Adam appear too
late in human history to start the human race, Noah appears too late to
terminate it. Bummer. And it sounded like such a good idea at the time.

I have to admit I like your way better, but I have been guided consistently
by the weight of data and evidence. And although I might prefer it your
way, I feel compelled to stick with an explanation that can be
supported. We don't get it the way we like it, we have to like it like it
is. And if we don't like it initially, it might grow on us, which is what
happened to me. Hope I saved you five years.

>BTW, as a Calvinist I have to disagree about the infant thing. We are
>born sinners. We may not hold them accountable, but God does.

All analogies break down at some point. But I would be surprised if any
Homo erectus reside in heaven or hell.

Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
Received on Fri Feb 27 19:48:05 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Feb 27 2004 - 19:48:13 EST