The lies about gen 6

[ewq1938]

Your pushing a meaningless non issue. I have no idea what you are talking about.

I can't re-word it any simplier than I already have. You are wrong about Adam being the first human. The bible never says that.

 

[Timtofly]

How does it change? you were saying there were many perhaps millions of people God created like Adam and Eve all over the earth, not just one person Adam, and one person Eve, with Adam living alone away from all the other people.
I am pointing out the scriptures say there was only Adam and Eve at the beginning and no more direct creation by God of any other people. Only through Eve were all subsequent people born, you still can not admit to it though it seems.

You said it another way this here
"Eve could never be the mother of all the sons of God. Eve was certainly not Adam's mother."

And the scriptures say she was the mother of all living people, that would exclude Adam of course, as Adam would be the father of all living people.
You just do not agree with scripture about Adam and Eve. And that is what I keep pointing out here in this thread.

I am saying if you exclude Adam, then you exclude those sons of God created on the 6th Day.

It was the sons of God who became corrupt by procreating with Adam's fallen offspring.

I certainly do agree with Scripture. On the 6th Day God created the sons of God. All of them, and they were male and female. We were not told about them, because our story deals with Adam and sin. They were not sinners. But any offspring they had with Adam's dead flesh certainly were sinners. The sons of God became corrupted. Adam's flesh was not made whole because of this procreation process.

 

[Scott Downey]

I can't re-word it any simplier than I already have. You are wrong about Adam being the first human. The bible never says that.

You are an evolutionist then.

 

[Scott Downey]

I am saying if you exclude Adam, then you exclude those sons of God created on the 6th Day.

It was the sons of God who became corrupt by procreating with Adam's fallen offspring.

I certainly do agree with Scripture. On the 6th Day God created the sons of God. All of them, and they were male and female. We were not told about them, because our story deals with Adam and sin. They were not sinners. But any offspring they had with Adam's dead flesh certainly were sinners. The sons of God became corrupted. Adam's flesh was not made whole because of this procreation process.

I already showed you do not.
Genesis 3:20
And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
Every single person that ever was born, was born from Eve.

 

[ewq1938]

I already showed you do not.
Genesis 3:20
And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.

Adam was alive and Eve was not his mother, nor was she the mother of all living animals etc. Seems Adam's decision there is his own, and not to be taken literally. Clearly in context he is saying she is the mother of all their children.

 

[Timtofly]

I already showed you do not.
Genesis 3:20
And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
Every single person that ever was born, was born from Eve.

You do understand that is the first words out of a condemned man, who physically and spiritually died after disobeying God?

Where is; "I am sorry God, Please forgive me"?

You accept the first lie ever told as a sinful human, as being inspired of God, truth?

Cains wife was not born from Eve. Her parents were not born from Eve. Adam was not born from Eve.

Noah was born from Eve. His sons were born from him.

You are accepting a lie when you claim all living were born from Eve. What is true, is that all those dead in sin can blame their mother Eve. Adam should have said Eve was the mother of all dead flesh. That would have been true. It just does not sound as boastful as the lie. Unless those sons of God multiplied a different way than by being a mother and giving birth. But Eve was still not the mother of all those sons of God, humans created on the 6th day. She did not adopt them all either. She was the mother of all sinners, and that is it.

When Moses wrote those words down on mount Sinai, Eve was the mother of all those living on earth at that time. If that is what you meant, it had nothing to do with those sons of God created on the 6th day.

All life prior to the Flood had been long forgotten, by the time Israel was leaving Egypt. It would have made sense at that point. It makes sense today. But when those words came out of Adam's mouth, it was a lie, and Adam was boasting about sin, not a biological fact.

 

[BeyondET]

You do understand that is the first words out of a condemned man, who physically and spiritually died after disobeying God?

Where is; "I am sorry God, Please forgive me"?

You accept the first lie ever told as a sinful human, as being inspired of God, truth?

Cains wife was not born from Eve. Her parents were not born from Eve. Adam was not born from Eve.

Noah was born from Eve. His sons were born from him.

You are accepting a lie when you claim all living were born from Eve. What is true, is that all those dead in sin can blame their mother Eve. Adam should have said Eve was the mother of all dead flesh. That would have been true. It just does not sound as boastful as the lie. Unless those sons of God multiplied a different way than by being a mother and giving birth. But Eve was still not the mother of all those sons of God, humans created on the 6th day. She did not adopt them all either. She was the mother of all sinners, and that is it.

When Moses wrote those words down on mount Sinai, Eve was the mother of all those living on earth at that time. If that is what you meant, it had nothing to do with those sons of God created on the 6th day.

All life prior to the Flood had been long forgotten, by the time Israel was leaving Egypt. It would have made sense at that point. It makes sense today. But when those words came out of Adam's mouth, it was a lie, and Adam was boasting about sin, not a biological fact.

Hmm if Adam was boasting about sin, why would God clothed Adam to protect him from the elements in the next verse?

 

[Scott Downey]

You do understand that is the first words out of a condemned man, who physically and spiritually died after disobeying God?

Where is; "I am sorry God, Please forgive me"?

You accept the first lie ever told as a sinful human, as being inspired of God, truth?

Cains wife was not born from Eve. Her parents were not born from Eve. Adam was not born from Eve.

Noah was born from Eve. His sons were born from him.

You are accepting a lie when you claim all living were born from Eve. What is true, is that all those dead in sin can blame their mother Eve. Adam should have said Eve was the mother of all dead flesh. That would have been true. It just does not sound as boastful as the lie. Unless those sons of God multiplied a different way than by being a mother and giving birth. But Eve was still not the mother of all those sons of God, humans created on the 6th day. She did not adopt them all either. She was the mother of all sinners, and that is it.

When Moses wrote those words down on mount Sinai, Eve was the mother of all those living on earth at that time. If that is what you meant, it had nothing to do with those sons of God created on the 6th day.

All life prior to the Flood had been long forgotten, by the time Israel was leaving Egypt. It would have made sense at that point. It makes sense today. But when those words came out of Adam's mouth, it was a lie, and Adam was boasting about sin, not a biological fact.

All children came from Adam and Eve. Adam was not boasting about his sin, you have no clue from scripture he was or that he was lying.
Eve had many children, not all are named. The prohibition from God's law against marrying a sister was not in force at the time as the law had not yet been given to man by God. And people lived many hundreds of years. the law came through Moses. Abraham also married his half sister, the daughter of his father.

Sarah - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

According to Book of Genesis 20:12, in conversation with the Philistine king Abimelech of Gerar, Abraham reveals Sarah to be both his wife and his half-sister, stating that the two share a father but not a mother.[7] Such unions were later explicitly banned in the Book of Leviticus (Leviticus 18:9).

This would make Sarah the daughter of Terah and the half-sister of not only Abraham but Haran and Nahor. She would also have been the aunt of Lot, Milcah, Iscah, and Bethuel, by both blood and marriage. By her union with Abraham, she had one child, Isaac.[8] After her death, Abraham married Keturah, whose identity biblical scholars debate (that is, whether or not she was actually Hagar), and by her had at least six more children.

And then after the flood of Noah, Noah had 3 sons who had wives, so you know they were intermarrying each other's immediate families. And this was all ok by God. We don't know whose family lines the wives were of, but most likely they were all part of the lineage of Noah too, not of the wicked unbelieving families all over the earth at that time.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I asked a question. I did not accuse you. Your answer was that it did not matter if Eve was created on the 6th Day. If it does not matter, why are you upset at me for asking a question?

I would never claim you deny what happened on day 6. I accept that man was created on day 6. They were the sons of God. Adam was a son of God. Adam stopped being a son of God, when he disobeyed God. Since the Flood all have been offspring of Noah.

Now if Eve was not created on day 6, how are there them, plural? Obviously there were thousands of sons of God, even before and after Adam disobeyed God. They were still mankind created on day six and all their offspring. God created them as in many of them. They multiplied and filled the earth. Adam was placed in the Garden of Eden, thus separated from all others socially. That is why he was alone. Not because God only created Adam on the 6th day.

well, next time put a question mark so I know you are asking instead of accusing.

Your misunderstanding comes from an apparent abandoning of simple rules of grammar. When God created Adam, He declared it on day six. Then in verse 27 it is a simple statement of fact and not time when it says God made them male and female.

Seriously, do you really think you need to correct God when He used the singular instead of the plural? If God who is smart enough to create by speaking can create, I accept He is smart enough to know when to use the singular and when to use the plural.

Seriously, with so many of you, i9t is no longer Bible discussions, but going back and teaching basic grammar all over again.

You make the Bible some kind of secret code book! what God inspired ot write is not what He meant and we need some modern clairvoyants to reveal what He really meant. to this I say hogwash!!!!!

 

[Scott Downey]

1 Corinthians 15:45
And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

Adam is specifically the FIRST MAN. And that has been the truth understood from the beginning by just about all people except a few on this forum, and also modern interpreters who do not accept a 6 day creation but believe man evolved from things like apes.


Paul is referring to Genesis 2 when writing the above verse, and he directly links to this Adam as the first man.
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

And this man ADAM was created directly by God before there were ANY WOMEN.


15 Then the Lord God took [d]the man and put him in the garden of Eden to [e]tend and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you[f] shall surely die.”

18 And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”

 

[Scott Downey]

More proof Adam was the first and only man and there were no created women at the beginning before man was created.
The women was created for the man, and the man was created first. Only Adam and Eve were created as man and women alone by themselves. Everyone else was born from a woman.

1 Corinthians 11
7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.
8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man.
9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.
10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
11 Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord.
12 For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God.

Women came from Man. Created after man was created.

 

[ewq1938]

Women came from Man. Created after man was created.

And God made animals before he made man and woman, Gen 1. In Gen 2 God decides to make man before animals and a woman after the animals.

 

[Scott Downey]

And God made animals before he made man and woman, Gen 1. In Gen 2 God decides to make man before animals and a woman after the animals.

Do Genesis 1 and 2 Contradict Each Other?

The issue that people have with Genesis 2 is that the order of the creation of man, animals, and trees seems to be contrary to the order stated in Genesis 1.

answersingenesis.org

Have you ever heard of the pluperfect form?

Excerpt
At first glance this seems to be a contradiction because Genesis 1 has the animals and trees created prior to the creation of man; however, both issues can be resolved by an understanding of the original language and the translation process.2 The Hebrew word for formed in both passages is yatsar. The New King James Version (quoted above) translates the verb in its perfect form.

However, this Hebrew word may also be translated in its pluperfect form. In this case, it would read that God “had formed” these creatures, as some other translations have it (e.g. ESV, NIV, etc.) For example, Genesis 2:19 in the NIV states:

Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them. (emphasis mine)

This rendering eliminates any problem with the chronology because it refers to what God had already done earlier in Creation Week. This would mean that the plants (Genesis 2:9) and the animals (Genesis 2:19) had already been formed by God earlier in Creation Week. William Tyndale was the first to translate an English Bible directly from the original languages,3 and He also translated the verb in its pluperfect form.

 

[Scott Downey]

The bible we read in English is a translation, we don't read the original texts.
Issues in our understanding can come up just like Genesis 1 and 2.
Paul a chosen apostle by Christ, wrote what he did about Adam and Eve.
You can either chose to believe it as he wrote it, or not.

 

[ewq1938]

Do Genesis 1 and 2 Contradict Each Other?

The issue that people have with Genesis 2 is that the order of the creation of man, animals, and trees seems to be contrary to the order stated in Genesis 1.

answersingenesis.org

Have you ever heard of the pluperfect form?

The verb is not in the pluperfect form.


The Hebrew manuscripts and proper translations say "formed" not "had formed"

Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

This is a creating of animals after Adam was created. The fact that Adam was alone in the garden further proves this.

Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.



The Aspect/Form (or verb tense as we say in English) is in the imperfect which means it was not a completed action but one taking place currently in the verse so God indeed was creating animals out of the ground right there in front of Adam.

Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make (imperfect form) him an help meet for him.


This verse proves there were no animals in the newly planted garden so God had to make them for Adam which we see happening in the next verse.





You can also see how this works here:

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man (imperfect) of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Man is being created. Imperfect verb

Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. (perfect because it had already been accomplished)

Man has already been created. Perfect verb.


Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

So if this really should be "had formed" as part of a previous creation the Verb should be in the PERFECT yet it is not. It is written in the IMPERFECT because it was not something God had done in the past.

 

[Scott Downey]

The verb is not in the pluperfect form.


The Hebrew manuscripts and proper translations say "formed" not "had formed"

Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

This is a creating of animals after Adam was created. The fact that Adam was alone in the garden further proves this.

Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.



The Aspect/Form (or verb tense as we say in English) is in the imperfect which means it was not a completed action but one taking place currently in the verse so God indeed was creating animals out of the ground right there in front of Adam.

Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make (imperfect form) him an help meet for him.


This verse proves there were no animals in the newly planted garden so God had to make them for Adam which we see happening in the next verse.





You can also see how this works here:

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man (imperfect) of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Man is being created. Imperfect verb

Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. (perfect because it had already been accomplished)

Man has already been created. Perfect verb.


Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

So if this really should be "had formed" as part of a previous creation the Verb should be in the PERFECT yet it is not. It is written in the IMPERFECT because it was not something God had done in the past.

Are There Two Creation Stories In Genesis?

A few supporters of the Bible say, "Genesis Chapter 2 is just a repeat of chapter 1.” But chapter 2 stands up on its own.

www.genesisforordinarypeople.com

I dont have any mental conflict with Genesis 1 and 2, and neither should anyone else.

Article excerpt
Critics say that Genesis chapter 1 has the animals created before humans but chapter 2 has a human created before the animals; however, that objection disappears once we take into account the absence of pluperfect tense in Hebrew.

Early Hebrew states the completion of an event but leaves the time of the event to be inferred by the context. “Context is king” is a saying that some Bible translators like to use; they say it because it’s true. Hebrew tenses do not convey the time but simply the state of an action. Genesis 2:7 (kjv) says, “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” This means, “The LORD God, who had previously formed man of the dust . . . ” which is the same as Genesis 2:19 that says, “And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them.” The meaning being that the Lord God had previously formed the beasts that we read about in Genesis chapter 1. That's why some Bible translations add the word "had" - "Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals" (Gen 2:19 NIV). We can do the same with Genesis 2:7 when the man is mentioned, the King James Version says this, "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground." Yes, the Lord God had formed this man (and all of us) from the dust of the ground.

In modern English we are able to use the pluperfect tense easily. The pluperfect tense is used to indicate that an action took place before some other action in the past. (Two events in the past that happened at different times to each other.) We use the pluperfect tense when we use the word “had” twice in succession: “Michael arrived smelly at the party last Saturday night because he had had to retrieve his wallet that had fallen into a drain.” There are other ways of using the pluperfect tense: “By the time I made my entrance into the party Michael had left.” Alphabet-based writing was in its infancy when Genesis was written so staying true to the original text means there's no pluperfect tense.

 

[Truth7t7]

I can't re-word it any simplier than I already have. You are wrong about Adam being the first human. The bible never says that.

Your theology is wacked, Adam was the first created human as per scripture

It's to a point where I don't even take your claims seriously, just being honest

 

[ewq1938]

Your theology is wacked, Adam was the first created human as per scripture

The bible says no such thing.

 

[ewq1938]

The meaning being that the Lord God had previously formed the beasts that we read about in Genesis chapter 1.

This is incorrect. The verb tense used in Gen 2 is one that means the creating is happening at that time, not a previous time. This proves that God is creating animals in front of Adam.

 

[ewq1938]

“Michael arrived smelly at the party last Saturday night because he had had to retrieve his wallet that had fallen into a drain.”

That sentence is bad bad. It is more smelly than Michael.