Were Adam and Eve Real? New Anthropological Evidence in 10-Year Update to Book (Interview)

Christian Post ^ | 10/26/2015 | Napp Nazworth

[cloudmountain]

It is very interesting that evidence of written human records goes back as far as about 5000 years but no further. This says a lot about the Biblical truth of the Noah flood that wiped everything out except for Noah and his family and the animals. Doesn’t really directly point to Adam but does verify Biblical accuracy.

Perhaps Adam and Eve were just the first homo sapiens: a conscience, sense of right and wrong tuned to that conscience, awareness of death, belief in an eternal soul and an afterlife. After all there had been hominids (homo erectus) around for a long time. I think that there still are some Neanderthals, both male and female, still roaming our cities. Maybe I'm being harsh.
According to the studies of humans, there were several specials of hominids that didn't survive. I assume that the older and failed hominids didn't believe in a Higher Being or God.

[cloudmountain]

There WERE several species of hominids whose existence ended--failed hominids. That's even on Google.

As you say, that doesn't impact my life a great deal. It impacts my life not at all.

[Ann Archy]

OMG...that doesn’t mean we don’t believe GENESIS like he said!!! 6 DAYS could mean 6 SECONDS, 6 MINUTES, or it could mean 6 DAYS.......geesh....you Protestants are really something.

[ealgeone]

However, the Hebrew means six 24 hour days.

[Jack Hydrazine]

Wow! That’s news to me. And I bet the place where they grew up was in Bourbon, MO!

[Ann Archy]

Well then, that’s that!!! Just like their year of 5176 means that’s how old the earth is!!

[JimRed]

How can it be when it starts with His LITERAL father, Joseph?

His Earthly stepfather, since He is the Son of God.

[onedoug]

La Brea Woman is fairly well documented to have been thrown into the Tar Pits of Los Angeles some 9,000 years ago. Forensics note she had a tooth abscess and may have been thrown in because of her aberrant behavior to that point.

[Jim W N]

Heck no. They found out she fell in there after a wild party in Beverly hills.

[onedoug]

So much then for your “ZERO verifiable evidence”.

[Jim W N]

How so?

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

The Hebrew doesn't back it up, at all. Yom has multiple literal meanings dependent on context, and in the context of Genesis it can't mean "24 hr. day" in a literal sense because for half of the period of creation there was no sun, hence no solar time. That is why the CCC states that "Scripture presents the work of the Creator symbolically as a succession of six days," because six yoms of labor followed by 1 yom of rest is a clear representation of a solar week.

And another thing -- the CCC does NOT say that Genesis is symbolic, only that the use of the word "day" to refer to the yoms of creation is symbolic, which is obvious by the structure of the sentence alone. It does NOT say that the act of creation is symbolic, or that the reality of creation is symbolic. To say "Catholics think Genesis is symbolic" is, at best, a massive stretch. But hey, anything to forward the old agenda, by hook or by crook. The end justifies the means, apparently, when attempting to discredit Catholicism.

[ealgeone]

And another thing -- the CCC does NOT say that Genesis is symbolic, only that the use of the word "day" to refer to the yoms of creation is symbolic, which is obvious by the structure of the sentence alone. It does NOT say that the act of creation is symbolic, or that the reality of creation is symbolic. To say "Catholics think Genesis is symbolic" is, at best, a massive stretch. But hey, anything to forward the old agenda, by hook or by crook. The end justifies the means, apparently, when attempting to discredit Catholicism.

In the past hundred years or so, the various papal writings and Councils have commented upon the matter of the historicity of certain parts of the Scriptures. Let me offer a quote from an encyclical letter of Pope Pius XII titled, “Humani Generis” (1950):

“..the first eleven chapter of Genesis...nevertheless come under the heading of history; in what exact sense, it is for the further study of the exegete to determine. These chapters have a naïve, symbolic way of speaking, well suited to the understanding of primitive people.

http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage_print.asp?number=359658&language=en

The pope is supposed to be the Vicar of Christ per catholicism and he can't say one way or the other??

Fortunately, we have the written Word given to us by the Lord to settle the manner.

The Lord also knew they were six days as He spoke to Moses in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17

The writer of Hebrews understood it as he quoted the OT. Heb 4:4

Christ believed in a literal Adam as He noted in Mark 10:11, "but from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.

Paul believed in a literal Adam as he wrote in Romans 5:14.

These are the words the Holy Spirit moved the writers of the OT and NT to pen.

The weight of Scripture on this issue is against the catholilc, or anyone, who doubts in a literal creation, or that the events of Genesis did indeed occur.

The question now becomes: DO YOU BELIEVE WHAT HE HAS WRITTEN?

[RegulatorCountry]

Not just Missouri but a specific county. Jackson County.

[Jack Hydrazine]

“Haven’t seen a shred of verified evidence of man’s existence earlier than 6000 years ago.”

How about Gobekli Tepe in Turkey? It’s an ancient site dated back between 10,000 and 15,000 years ago. They don’t know who built it nor do they know why it was built and then later intentionally buried.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaoakxvqHWI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHG9URGDt6s

Here’s a video with Michael Cremo titled, “The Mysterious Origins of Man,” and hosted by the late Charleton Heston.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62Yp0dCqfpg

[Jim W N]

Questionable. This is a relatively recent find that probably needs more examination. I don’t question the age of the stones, they’re probably older than that. But I do question the conjecture of when this thing was assembled. My guess is they are off by about 6,000 years which isn’t much when it comes to dating ancient relics.

And if man was around earlier than 6,000 years ago, there would be MUCH more evidence than this.

[Jack Hydrazine]

How about this one in Bolivia? The snail shells at the site are radiocarbon dated to 10,000 years.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2404383/10-000-year-old-remains-settlements-unearthed-Bolivia—making-oldest-archaeological-site-Amazon.html

[Jim W N]

That’s snails, not man. We know there were creatures like dinosaurs before the first flood recorded in Genesis 1:2 (Noah’s flood was the second recorded world-wide flood). But the re-creation which included man is recorded as happening about 6000 years ago.