To be clear, Scripture doesn't simply focus on the line of Adam and Eve, but rather Adam and Eve are the only ones ever mentioned. To say Scripture only focus upon the line of Adam and Eve, sets up the presupposition that there are "other lines" Scripture mentioned when in fact there are none.
As myself and others have already pointed out in this thread, Scripture provides multiple indicators of lines of humanity outside of Adam.
The chronological relationship of the creation of humanity in Genesis 1:26-27 to the story of Adam and Eve in Genesis 2-3 is the first Scriptural indicator. Read chronologically, humanity is created in Genesis 1:26-27 some time before the story of Adam and Eve takes place in Genesis 2-3. The narrative context of the creation of humanity in Genesis 1:26-27 is very different from the narrative context of Genesis 2-3, so there is no reason based on the text itself to presume that Genesis 2-3 is a recapitulation of the story of Genesis 1:26-27. However, the presumption that Adam and Eve are the genetic progenitors of all humans leads to the traditional premise that Genesis 2-3 is a recapitulation of Genesis 1:26-27.
The chronological narrative of Genesis 1-3 without this presumption clearly states that humanity was created before the events of Genesis 2-3 take place and therefore Adam and Eve cannot be the genetic progenitors of all humanity.
You'll have to further explain, as I'm unclear on your points being made. That is, how such (Genesis 1:26-27 related to Genesis 2-3, different narrative [though I'd say same narrative, different focus]) indicates a lineage outside of Adam and Eve. Furthermore, other interpretations, for example RTB's popular Day-Age interpretation (which I thought you once were, unless I'm confusing you with others), do not
say Genesis 2 is a recapitulation of Genesis 1. To also make an observation of my own, I see no real "human narrative
" in Genesis 1, rather the creation of humans are an end part to a fuller creation narrative identifying Israel's God as the Lord and creator of everything. Genesis 2, at about Gen 2:5, then begins to set the scene as the focus "zooms in" on God's relationship with the man and women.
Further, the Hebrew word for man, is "adam", the Hebrew word for woman is "adamah
is also translatable as "earth" or "ground". In Genesis 1, God makes man and woman, the root meaning of which ties in with "red" (i.e., soil) and the "ground". Genesis 2, I see does extend the creation narrative, focusing upon God with his final creation of this "formed of the earth" man (adam
) and woman (adamah
Language-wise, if we look at the mere Hebrew terms even, there is just little to no movement to say "man" and "woman" exist who didn't come from Adam and Eve as told in Genesis. Anyone who carries the title "man" (adam) or "woman" (adamah), must terminologically be derived from Adam.
So the only way there could exist a different "lineage" is if such were not "adam" or "adamah" i.e., human beings. The obviously implication here being all adam
are from Adam and Eve. Don't you see, the very nature of the Hebrew language, doesn't allow for any "man" to have arisen except that he be from Adam.
So then, if there exist different "lineages" as you say, then such lineages are not human, like Adam and Eve were human. Rather, they are some other animal species, hominids? I don't know, it's not my theory. But the one thing that can't be said of Scripture, is that they're of the same species, merely different lineages. Hebrew terms don't allow us to call someone adam
(man) and adamah
(woman) unless, and only unless, they fall under Adam and Eve.
DB wrote:Example 2:
The story of Cain also provides multiple indicators of the existence of humanity outside the line of Adam.
In Genesis 4:14 when Cain is banished from the land he is concerned that as he wanders the earth, whoever finds him will kill him. Taken at face value this indicates that there are people who are not living in "the land" who Cain will encounter as he wonders the earth. The only progeny of Adam and Eve mentioned at this point in the narrative are Cain and Able, and yet Scripture explicitly states that there are people who are not living in "the land" where Adam and Eve live.
Of course, humans exist outside of the lineage being traced
through Genesis chapter 4 (Cain's) & chapter 5 (Seth's), but this doesn't mean these other lineages were not of Adam and Eve.
Adam and Eve are said to have had other sons and daughters in addition to the three mentioned: Cain, Abel and Seth. In Genesis 4:25, Seth is said to be a replacement for Abel, but this doesn't mean they hadn't had many other sons and daughters before then in fulfilment of God's command to be fruitful and increase (Gen 1:28).
We read in Genesis 5 the recorded age of Adam and Eve when they had Seth:
- 3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.
6 When Seth had lived 105 years, he became the father of Enosh. 7 After he became the father of Enosh, Seth lived 807 years and had other sons and daughters. 8 Altogether, Seth lived a total of 912 years, and then he died.
Many times the men are said to be over 100 years before begetting a son, but I sincerely doubt they didn't have any children before such an age. It's just that Noah's ancestral line is being followed. So then, we only have three children referenced, but if we assume the Bible's human ages, and say on average Adam and Eve had 3 children every 10 years, I don't think that's a stretch at all given they have not much else to do, then Seth could have been child number 39.
Presuming Cain killed Abel just before this, then by this time there could have easily been 200,000 people already roaming the Earth. And that's a conservative estimate based upon women ages 16 and up. I did up an Excel spreadsheet, and didn't even get to the fourth generation before realising the population of humanity could have been very high by the time Cain killed Abel. One can assume far lesser numbers than 3 every 10 years, like 1 child every 10 years (especially with a divine imperative to multiply and fill the Earth), and they don't have the same contraceptives and distractions with education and the like getting in the way. Note too, that women are generally more than men, and some men were taking more than one women. If we split sexes 50/50 however, it really doesn't take long for humans to multiply.
So then, by the time Cain killed Abel, he had a wife and presumably even his own family. They moved, built a new city, which was named after his son Enoch. I really don't see the issue. The main issue isn't with where did Cain find a wife, for there would have literally been 1000s to choose from (you do that math!), and there could have even been 10s of thousands if he did take a new wife. Further, depending upon how quickly people kept having sex and producing children, there could have potentially been hundreds of thousands of people spread out into other areas.
DB wrote:In Genesis 4:16 after being banished from the Lord's presence Cain then moves to the land of Nod where he finds a wife and establishes a family. Cain's wife is another person mentioned in Scripture who is not identified as a descendent of Adam and Eve.
Then in Genesis 4:17 Cain builds a city. Building a city implies that there is a population where Cain is living to inhabit the city. Again another Scriptural indication that Cain encountered human population groups who were not descendents of Adam and Eve as he travelled to locations that were not part of the land where Adam and Eve dwelled.
Here you're actually incorrect, and it is obvious (no insult intended) you are working with a current narrative that has claimed your interest and these verses are being made to fit in without really paying much attention to what is actually being said.
Re-read Genesis 4, Scripture doesn't say Cain found a wife in the land of Nod, rather it simply says "Cain knew his wife" and they conceived Enoch. Cain called the name of the city he founded in the land of Nod after his son Enoch. The city came after his son was born, Cain already had a family. And no doubt Enoch wasn't the first, but rather likely the one born around this time. Cain may have had many others of his descendants follow him out from Adam, which could have easily numbered in the thousands.
DB wrote:So in the Genesis 1-4 narrative we have multiple indicators in Scripture itself that humanity existed before and outside the line of Adam and Eve.
If you say so, I still don't see it and strongly disagree.
K wrote:I think your more persuasive claims, aren't to be found in what Scripture is silent on, which I really don't think it is. But rather, in drawing from scientific knowledge.
I don't think it's an either/or situation.
I think Special Revelation and General Revelation both provide truth. And I do not think that one source of truth will contradict other sources of truth.
As I show above I don't think Scripture is silent on the existence of humanity outside the line of Adam and Eve.
I think Scripture and Science agree on the existence of humanity outside the line of Adam and Eve.
However, in this case I do think there is a conflict between Science and the "tradition" that Adam and Eve were the genetic progenitors of all humanity.
But I think it is important to note that the conflict here is not between Science and Scripture. The real conflict is between Science and Tradition.
Like I said, truth is truth, so I'm happy for scientific evidence to be presented. Again, and sorry to say, but I don't see Scripture in any other way other than supporting all coming from Adam and Eve.
DB wrote: K wrote:
DB wrote:Scripture nowhere claims that Adam and Eve were the first humans, therefore asserting that they were is by definition an extrascriptural supposition. That doesn't mean the supposition is necessarily wrong. It just means that the basis of the supposition is something other than what Scripture explicitly states.
Contrary to this, the whole of theme found in Scripture from Genesis to Revelation is centred upon God's relationship to humanity. I really don't think this position you're advocating came about via Scripture alone, as no one reading Scripture would be lead to such a position.
I think Michael Heiser has an adequate rebuttal to that assertion.
Taking Genesis 1-3 at Face Value: Is it Compatable with Recent Genome Research?
http://drmsh.com/genesis-13-face-compat ... -research/
I'll take a read, it'd be much better reading the source of your information than second hand. So if Heiser is one, I'll examine his claims with an open mind.