How sad that you think there's a difference between Christian theology and Christian reality.
I see the need to macro Genesis 1 and 2 child's play, as if God did not know what He had Moses pen.
No, it's just telling two parts of the same story. No one points at a history of WWII and a history of the battle of Midway and says they are in contradiction. If Genesis 1 describes the Creation Week and Genesis 2 describes a portion of that week, they don't contradict each other or any other part of the Bible. If they describe what you say they do, they contradict parts of the New Testament that teach individual sin as coming into the world with Adam and call him the first man.
Even worldly history describes the time of hunter/gathers before agriculture became a recognized method of livelihood.
You're judging your Bible by the world's thoughts instead of the other way around.
Occam nor his razor is mentioned in the whole of the Bible by name or instrument.
True, but that doesn't mean the concept is unbiblical or anti-biblical any more than the fact that you and I are communicating in a language with completely different syntax rules than Hebrew and Greek is unbiblical.
The Bible does mention truth a lot, though. And it says that sin was introduced through Adam (1 Cor 15:22) and that he was the first human being. You say otherwise. Who do you think I will put my trust in?
Sad or not it is a fact. I do not consider the WORD of God theology, it is reality.
No, it's just telling two parts of the same story. No one points at a history of WWII and a history of the battle of Midway and says they are in contradiction. If Genesis 1 describes the Creation Week and Genesis 2 describes a portion of that week, they don't contradict each other or any other part of the Bible. If they describe what you say they do, they contradict parts of the New Testament that teach individual sin as coming into the world with Adam and call him the first man.
Obviously it is not my duty to convince you that the way it is Written came from God Himself, and He did not need any of His children to macro His Words. There is no contradiction by the Creator. However, He did warn there would be consequences to any and all that changed His word. Some do so in ignorance from traditions of men others know full well what they were doing. I do not 'deny' Adam was the first flesh human that sinned. The Bible also records that the devil sinned before this flesh world/age, and is the only named entity that has already been judged to be destroyed from within forever.... a number of his followers, who refused to come through this flesh age have too been judged to eternal death. Neither action has yet taken place.
You're judging your Bible by the world's thoughts instead of the other way around.
This is real confusing. God had Moses pen in Genesis 1:26 what the livelihood for those He created on the 6th day would be. AND before He had Moses pen that He formed the Adam, God had Moses write that there was NO man to till the ground. AND recorded history agrees with what God told Moses to write. I have even read that Chinese history predates 6000 years. I wasn't there so I can't verify but I sure would not be surprised if it their history did predate 6000 years.
True, but that doesn't mean the concept is unbiblical or anti-biblical any more than the fact that you and I are communicating in a language with completely different syntax rules than Hebrew and Greek is unbiblical. The Bible does mention truth a lot, though. And it says that sin was introduced through Adam (1 Cor 15:22) and that he was the first human being. You say otherwise. Who do you think I will put my trust in?
I should have done this in my first post. My Strong's Greek dictionary says that all of the times Adam is used in the New Testament are from the same Greek word. Strong's # 76... ad-am'; Of Heb. or. [121] Adam, the first man; typ. (of Jesus) man (as his representative): -Adam.
Strong's Greek 121 ath;-o-os; from I (as a neg. particle) and a prob. der. of 5087 (mean. a penalty); not guilty: - innocent.
Now the Hebrew meaning of that word Adam is Strong's #120 aw-dawm'; from 119; ruddy, i.e. a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.):- x another, + hypocrite, + common sort, x low, man (mean, of low degree), person.
Strong's Hebrew #119 aw-dam'; to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy:-be dyed, made) red (ruddy).
Interestingly David was also described as 'ruddy'. ISamuel 16:12; ISamuel 17:42.
Strong's Hebrew ruddy is #132 ad-mo-nee', or (fully) ad-mo-nee'; from 119; reddish (of the hair or the complexion): -red, ruddy.
Just a little background in what the name Adam as used in Genesis and ICorinthians actually mean.
IF the first Adam showed blood in the face we have a whole lot of quick time evolution taking place to have represented here on this earth right now all the different faces of God's children.