Haha... This is like chicken or the egg...

I'm in the belief that we assigned the meaning "mankind" to the actual name of the man. With Adam being the first of the people of God and the rest as sons of man as a result of lucifer's rebellion... I don't think the core family of Adam and Eve could've populated the world through incest... Ought to have some other source as well...

And depending on the physical location they were in, there may have been people that seemed to be "giants" so to speak. Just as we differ in hight from person to person these days. Some of our ancestory lived in an area we "evolved" to be tall for survival of whatever the enviroment was in that specific time/area, as the same for people that are short(er). It's all through evolution which is an extended period of "adaptation".

Also have to keep in mind how much time may have passed between the different accounts throughout the scriptures. Yes some of it does intlude the time framing eg., the creation of the world, ect. But there's no telling how much time went between the creation of Adam and the fall of Adam.

They did and they didn't. As again Adam isn't a singular being, nor is Eve. No telling on exactly how many "people" were included in the mention of "Adam/Eve".

Following your logic on the matter... It would not make sense for the Israelites to kill off other tribes, if there was no difference in their origin....as it was believed that they did so in order to occupy Canaan from those that were not the children of God...
The conclusion is that there would be no difference between Gentiles and Jews....

Again, you gotta keep in mind the possible hundreds of years to passed between each incident. So the origin wouldn't really play a huge part in any decision they made.

Israelites didn't specifically kill off other tribes just because. God promised Isrealites land and he swore he would give it to them. Thus God helped them move to the land he promised them.


Joshua 21:43

43 And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.

True that... Not discounting the time element, since people then lived much much longer than now. Nor am I discounting the reason that they killed the other tribes that time...
But all I'm saying is that I do believe that there is a distinction in the origin of the people of God and the sons and daughters of man. And that although we have assigned a meaning to the name or word Adam , that he was in fact, a distinct entity and not just symbolism...
But that is not to say that any one of us is less than the other, since that is precisely the purpose of Jesus.... For when by one man sin entered the world that many died...much more is the grace of God thru another....
Hence, a distinct entity... Not just a collective for mankind....

And this is where context comes into play. Some of the mentions of "Adam" is for all of mankind and other's moreso a singular being. Would depend on the context of the verse(s) in question. And don't know of this "symbolism" you're talking about. Adam is bout equivelant to the term "human", as Adam means mankind. And the biggest example of this is Cain's wife. Because if you read the words literally and or in singular context, Cain never would have had a wife, especially not from another tribe as there would be no other tribes/people.

I see... About "Adam" being contextual, that is. But I think switching from one context to another simply complicates the matter in terms of interpreting the bible...

Cain would have taken a wife from a different tribe... They would have existed and heard about the fratricide... That's why he was given a mark to prevent his getting murdered himself.... Right?

What mark do you suppose was given?

Yes that's why he was given the mark to keep him safe. I don't know 100% what the mark looked like, but I out of curiousity yahoo searched the mark of Cain and it seems to be a specific mark, not sure where they got their knowledge of the mark lol. But nevertheless all the various marks were the same in the search.

so this does give strong implication that there were already existing sons and daughters of man with their own set of moral codes, existing alongside the timeline of Adam and Eve (again as separate entities from the rest of mankind), likely even prior to their banishment from the garden...

but i think the mark was also supposed to protect him from being killed by "beasts" at the same time... whatever these beasts may be considered as...

??? You lost me there. We are not seperate from Adam and Eve, we are Adam and Eve.

While Adam and Eve begot Able, Cain, and Seth, they also begot daughters as well.

Now, because Adam and Eve were the next closest thing to being perfect humans, it stands to reason their offspring were also capable of inbreeding for an indefinite period of time. Thus, after Cain murdered Able, there were two dominant lineages from Cain and Seth through an indefinite number of sisters of their own original parents.

Only with the passing of time does the concept of incest become pertinent. Also, as time passes a broader number of immediate family members become ineligible as someone with whom One can get married to.

************ All Humanity Eventually Comes From Noah's Sons ************

Now, because all of humanity is wiped-out during the Great Flood of Noah's day, only Noah's three sons and their wives continue the lineage of humanity.

These sons of Noah are called, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Again remember, because the further back in time humanity goes... The greater the variety of 'closer-to-perfection' gene-pool there is.

In Genesis chapter 10, we can plainly read the displacement of the three dominant physical strains of humanity.

Shem and his wife begat the lineage of Oriental peoples.

Ham and his wife begat the lineage of Negro peoples.

Japheth and his wife begat the lineage of Caucasian peoples.

Noah doesn't have any more children upon disembarking, as his wife doesn't survive the voyage. (Surah 66: 10)

Genesis 8:18

18 And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him:

But that doesn't any real direct connection to Adam and Eve, as "Adam" is still here today, as again it means mankind. And that is why


1 Corinthians 15:45

45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.


Thus "Adam" couldn't very well be a singular being as their would be no need for both a "first" and "last". As if it was a singular being, that being would have to be the first and last automatically.

1 Corinthians 15
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.

I know where you're going with this... Noah's wife comes off the Ark, right?

Here's the thing... She's not alive!

Just resume looking for anymore children from Noah and his wife... There are none!

Noah, actually has a pretty good excuse to have a drink... Think about it! (Genesis 9: 20+21)

Ummm, Noah's sons' wives. And who knows how many wives each son had.

Okay Cowboy GH, I'm not going to argue that the 'Last Adam' isn't a superlative for Jesus Christ.

Because, I agree!

An excellent point!

There is absolutely no record in the Bible or the Quran as to how-many wives each of the sons of Noah had.

At the very least, we know each son had at least one wife each.

That is an interesting observation on Your part, Cowboy GH.

That was done A LOT, and not only Christians did it - they're just the ones who survived doing it. Christmas is set in late December to take the place of a lot of pagan and traditional celebrations for midwinter - the same goes for Easter for spring and Halloween for autumn. (You think it's any coincidence that Easter means the rising of Jesus Christ from the dead, when the whole world is "rising from the dead" of winter? Soooooooo much symbology has been lost or ignored in the past two-thousand years.)
(Also, why is "symbology" not a word in Mingle Squared's dictionary, but zymology is? Zymology apparently being the study of the fermentation process...)

Fortunately for the early evangelical Christians, there were a lot of things to work with. A lot of mythologies around the world have mention of a Great Flood, either at the creation of the world or sometime thereafter. There are also legends of giants and demons everywhere, even in the Americas. These were almost always antagonistic forces to humanity, which made things easier to get people to think of them as "anti-Christian" or "unholy".
In many mythologies, there were lots of male-led pantheons (i.e., a patriarchy) like Zeus, Odin, and Osiris that often had direct parallels to the acts of God or Jesus Christ. One of the more famous examples in literature is the parallel between Odin and Jesus - Odin sacrificed himself by hanging himself upside-down from a giant tree in order to gain wisdom. This was seen as a direct parallel to Jesus Christ being hung from the wooden cross and sacrificing his life for the Good of Mankind.

--------

Also, I hear it wasn't Jesus who was the vampire, but the Roman soldier Longinus, who stabbed Jesus with the spear.