At 02:07 PM 3/13/00 EST, PHSEELY@aol.com wrote:
>George said,
>
><< No. Saying that there is a context in which Genesis 3 might have
happened
>is
> not the same as having evidence that there was a real couple named Adam &
>Eve, the latter made from a rib of the former, who were tempted by a talking
>serpent &c. That is what would be required in order for you to say that you
>had evidence for Gen.2 & 3 to be "Historie wie es eigentlich gewesen
ist." >>
>
>This is essentially the question I have: Does Glenn accept early Genesis as
>accurate history or is the pot calling the kettle black?
Yes I do accept Genesis as actual history. THat is what my scenario is all
about. I am not the pot.
>
>The account says Adam named his wife (literally) Hawah because she would
>become the mother of all the Hay, a Hebrew word for "living. And Adam's
name
>is a Hebrew word for "man." Does Glenn believe these are the historically
>accurate names of the first two human beings even though the Hebrew language
>did not come into existence until the late second millenium BC?
I have never held anything other than that Adam means man. God created the
man. It is later peoples that turned it into an actual name.
>
>The account also says that the first woman was made from the rib of the
first
>man. Does Glenn believe this is accurate?
Yes. And what is the problem with this? God raised a man from the dead--can
you imagine that?
If he thinks women evolved
>alongside of men, how can he think this story about the creation of Eve is
>accurate history?
Why don't you look at my web page and find out, or look at my book. It
always kills me that people who want to criticise haven't even taken the
trouble to do a bit of reading that is easily available to them. It is much
easier to sit and throw stones than do a bit of reading. Shame on you Paul.
take a look at
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/synop.htm
and you will find your answer. One shouldn't have to spoon feed everything.
>
>Also, the account says Adam raised food in a garden;and that in his
>lifetime, one of his sons did the same, and the other raised domesticated
>animals. This is clearly Neolithic, that is to be dated no earlier than
>10,000 BC. Does Glenn believe this is accurate history?
Yes, once again, either read my book, read the web page or don't criticise
what you are too lazy to read. I also have an article in the PSCF which
approaches some of these issues.
Sorry but it always ticks me off to get criticisms like this when someone
obviously hasn't given the simplest courtesy or shown the simplest respect
by actually doing some research!!!!! This is especially true when it is so
accessible on the web. I really don't see why someone like you won't take
the courtesy to read and understand what I am saying. I read your book and
I understand what you are saying. It was so good it nearly drove me into
atheism last year. So please show me the same courtesy!
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 13 2000 - 21:28:15 EST