Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Creation of mankind


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#1 John Craford

John Craford

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts
  • Guest from Another Religious Tradition

Posted 02 September 2007 - 02:02 PM

I wanted to ask how are there other human rases (white, black etc.)? Were there other humans created besides Adam and Eve? And what about caveman? Thanks.

#2 Fr Raphael Vereshack

Fr Raphael Vereshack

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,420 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member
  • Verified Monastic Cleric

Posted 02 September 2007 - 09:33 PM

According to Genesis all nations or peoples came from Adam & Eve. Thus the point is that we all encompass each other since we share the same nature as being human. Looked at from another vantage point the differences we see in different people are inherent to each of us.

As for cavemen whatever we believe about this it is important to take account of the Patristic understanding that man was created from the beginning in the image & likeness of God. Whatever our ancient history we need also to take account of the Fall.

Something else to keep in mind is that in Genesis we see a gradual technological development & spreading of the peoples after Adam & Eve. Without becoming too doctrinaire about this in Genesis there is an unease about this 'progressive' development with a suggestion that on some level it reflects the Fall.

On the other hand God also works with the divisions created by this development among the peoples of the earth. Otherwise there would never have been a Hebrew people.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

#3 Paul Cowan

Paul Cowan

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,064 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 02 September 2007 - 11:10 PM

Dear J,

Before we get to anthropology, please look over these 3 threads. I particurly liked "How old is the Earth" thread post 19.

I found these 3 by searching for dinosaurs. It was in reference to your caveman question.

We are the human race. Within it there are varied biological differences. Black, white, brown, black hair, blue eyes, big nose, little ears. etc. these are God's way of making each of us unique and distinct to each other. But we are all human.

Only a dog can mate with a dog, only a whale can mate with a whale, only a human can mate with a human. Yet within each of these species, there are very many variations. Yes, there can be "accidents" of nature (not freaks of nature) but these should not be confused with evolution or some type of missing link as since the Fall we have all been subjected to gene altering conditions. excessive heat, excessive cold, corn syrup, and all those other additives in food on the grocery store shelf.

I have never seen it suggested but I have often wondered since Adam and Eve were the first created humans and Cain was concerned with being killed after he killed Abel, if perhaps God also created other humans and populated the Earth outside paradise postfall of course. It does not mention Adam and Eve having other children until Seth, but of course either position could be true.

Paul



#4 John Craford

John Craford

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts
  • Guest from Another Religious Tradition

Posted 03 September 2007 - 10:27 AM

Thank you.

P.S. Paul the link you posted in your post ain't working. Is the problem with my browser? Thank you anyways.

#5 Paul Cowan

Paul Cowan

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,064 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 03 September 2007 - 03:56 PM

Sorry, I am still learning how to use the hyperlinks.

Go to the search drop down box under the "private messages" link and type in dinosaurs. 3 threads come up. From there choose "How old is the earth thread."

#6 John Craford

John Craford

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts
  • Guest from Another Religious Tradition

Posted 03 September 2007 - 04:16 PM

Sorry, I am still learning how to use the hyperlinks.

Go to the search drop down box under the "private messages" link and type in dinosaurs. 3 threads come up. From there choose "How old is the earth thread."


No problem it's ok. Thank you.

#7 John Craford

John Craford

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts
  • Guest from Another Religious Tradition

Posted 22 September 2007 - 09:18 PM

Didn't know where else to post this.

http://s8int.com/

Is this site where I can learn from? I know that the Bible is correct and I don't believe in evolution but if I want to explain more scientificly something about Creation should I look at this site? Thanks and forgive me coz I am stupid and evil.

#8 Paul Cowan

Paul Cowan

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,064 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 22 September 2007 - 10:40 PM

Dear J,

First you are not supid and evil. God made you and He does not Make anything evil.

Second No, I would not classify this site as trustworthy. Highly subjectve, inquisitive and cute, yes, but theologically sound, no. The author would make a good sci-fi book from any of these topics, but since science nor man can know pre-flood or pre-antiquity, his position is purely from hs mind.

Yes, from a concensus of others with the same mind, but nothing that can truely be proven. It might make good entertainment, but don't put much stock into its authenticity.

Paul



#9 John Craford

John Craford

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts
  • Guest from Another Religious Tradition

Posted 23 September 2007 - 02:08 PM

Thanks for your reply and advice Paul Cowan.

#10 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 23 September 2007 - 05:51 PM

I would only second Paul's advice. That website sounds like the "Chariots of the Gods" craze that went on some years back. It does not take much digging to counter most of what is proclaimed as "facts" at the website. Most of it is conjecture based on flimsy, unsupported "evidence" that has already been debunked elsewhere. Fun to read if you enjoy science fiction, but nothing to base your Faith on.

#11 Grace McCann

Grace McCann

    Junior Poster

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 24 January 2008 - 05:54 PM

Hi Fr.Raphael,

I must have been reading to many threads any got this one confused with the topic of who did Cain & descendants marry. So my question for clarification is... in reference to "also take account of the Fall" and
"on some level it reflects the Fall". Thank you for your patience with my confusing questions.

from the heart, Grace


According to Genesis all nations or peoples came from Adam & Eve. Thus the point is that we all encompass each other since we share the same nature as being human. Looked at from another vantage point the differences we see in different people are inherent to each of us.

As for cavemen whatever we believe about this it is important to take account of the Patristic understanding that man was created from the beginning in the image & likeness of God. Whatever our ancient history we need also to take account of the Fall.

Something else to keep in mind is that in Genesis we see a gradual technological development & spreading of the peoples after Adam & Eve. Without becoming too doctrinaire about this in Genesis there is an unease about this 'progressive' development with a suggestion that on some level it reflects the Fall.

On the other hand God also works with the divisions created by this development among the peoples of the earth. Otherwise there would never have been a Hebrew people.

In Christ- Fr Raphael



#12 M. Partyka

M. Partyka

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 345 posts

Posted 25 January 2008 - 04:16 AM

According to Genesis all nations or peoples came from Adam & Eve. Thus the point is that we all encompass each other since we share the same nature as being human.

Fr. Raphael,

I'm curious about your choice of words here. It might just be an instant of literary flourish, but consider how the statement "feels" with the underlined part removed.

"According to Genesis all nations or peoples came from Adam & Eve. Thus we all encompass each other since we share the same nature as being human."

Phrased this way, the first sentence is a simple statement of fact, and the second sentence derives meaning from that fact.

Phrased the original way, however, the emphasis is forced onto the meaning in the second sentence, and the first sentence -- the simple statement of fact -- is devalued.

Was this an intended shift in emphasis, or am I reading too much into this?

#13 Fr Raphael Vereshack

Fr Raphael Vereshack

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,420 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member
  • Verified Monastic Cleric

Posted 26 January 2008 - 08:28 PM

M. Partyka asked:

I'm curious about your choice of words here. It might just be an instant of literary flourish, but consider how the statement "feels" with the underlined part removed.

Was this an intended shift in emphasis, or am I reading too much into this?


I'm afraid that a personal trademark of mine is that over time I forget not only what I said but its meaning! It's a wonder I remember my own name anymore!

In Christ- Fr Raphael

#14 Grace McCann

Grace McCann

    Junior Poster

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 27 January 2008 - 02:59 AM

Hi Fr.Raphael,

So does your last response mean that I'm out of luck in understanding your response that I underlined in your quote....

Oh, you would have fun in my home ~ I have 1 daughter (married) , 5 sons still at home, 3 Labs, 6 cats, 16 shih tzus, a husband ~ it's lucky I can remember any of the right names half the time. LOL

from the heart, Grace


Hi Fr.Raphael,

I must have been reading to many threads any got this one confused with the topic of who did Cain & descendants marry. So my question for clarification is... in reference to "also take account of the Fall" and
"on some level it reflects the Fall". Thank you for your patience with my confusing questions.

from the heart, Grace



#15 M.C. Steenberg

M.C. Steenberg

    Former Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,843 posts

Posted 27 January 2008 - 12:14 PM

I'm afraid that a personal trademark of mine is that over time I forget not only what I said but its meaning! It's a wonder I remember my own name anymore!


I find this revelation extremely comforting, as it places me in good company. My own personal trademark is to forget what I said, and later to come across it distilled in someone else's writing, and disagree with it in the strongest possible terms; then later to forget that I'd disagreed, encounter my refutation in some form, and disagree with that; only later to be placed in the position of disagreeing with both myself and... myself, having long since forgotten what it was I had once believed I was talking about.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

#16 Victor Mihailoff

Victor Mihailoff

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 26 February 2008 - 07:05 AM

I wanted to ask how are there other human rases (white, black etc.)? Were there other humans created besides Adam and Eve? And what about caveman? Thanks.


The first man and woman were genetically richer than we are today. They could give birth to every race of mankind. Even the animals were genetically richer then. That is why Noah's Arc could hold ancesters for all land animals and birds. For example, there are over 300 types of pigeons/doves in the world today but only two of them were needed on the arc to give birth to the beginnings of all the variations in the world today. The same applies to dogs and cats. Did you know that a man left his zebra in a paddock/coral with a friend's horse and a crossbreed was born. It had the strpes of one parent in parts and the pure white fur of the other as well. Then we have the big cats. Tigers and lions can give birth to cross breeds called ligers or tigons.

#17 Robert Hegwood

Robert Hegwood

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 297 posts

Posted 04 March 2008 - 02:37 PM

Long ago I recall reading somewhere that St. Gregory of Nyssa speculated that mankind was created en masse like all the other creatures but one was taken aside and enbreathed with the Holy Spirit who then became Adam our first father.

St. Gregory mentioned this in the context of God not creating a dead body for Adam and then enbreathing that, rather Adam began alive prior to God giving him the Holy Spirit and thus making him in the image of God.

If this is the case it answers the question about who Adam's children married after the fall better than other models. It does however raise some questions about the relationship of Adam and his family both pre and post fall to the other "humans". What did it mean for them when Adam was set apart? What did it mean for them when he fell? Did Adam's line revert "physically" to what they were prior allowing intermarriage with others. Did this intermarriage somehow communicate the "image of Godness" that Adam's line possessed or did that pass to other human's some other way if it did at all?

Of course there is the position that Adam was a distinct special creation and the fall saw him being given garments of skin taken from some undisclosed animal which might indicate Adam and Eve were somehow "fused" united with an extant type of creature which union produced "humanity" as we know it now. This answers other questions which are posed by evolutionary theory which points to a fairly extensive line of homonids prior to homo sapiens in the fossil record.

#18 Nina

Nina

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,149 posts

Posted 04 March 2008 - 04:11 PM

Robert, regarding St. Gregory of Nyssa there is a lot of misinformation and misinterpretation circulating, spread around by the heterodox. They are the ones who have wrongly attributed to him the theory of apokatastasis (restoration of all). However St. Gregory of Nyssa never stated, or implied such a theory in his writings and I do not think he would have ever said the speculation you mention "that mankind was created en masse like all the other creatures but one was taken aside and enbreathed with the Holy Spirit who then became Adam our first father". Since this statem is problematic in many levels. To name a few: 1.It denies our exclusive descendancy from Adam and Eve. 2.It would make the original sin absent.

Can you please quote the original source? (St. Gregory of Nyssa)

#19 Nina

Nina

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,149 posts

Posted 04 March 2008 - 04:17 PM

The first man and woman were genetically richer than we are today. They could give birth to every race of mankind. Even the animals were genetically richer then. That is why Noah's Arc could hold ancesters for all land animals and birds. For example, there are over 300 types of pigeons/doves in the world today but only two of them were needed on the arc to give birth to the beginnings of all the variations in the world today. The same applies to dogs and cats. Did you know that a man left his zebra in a paddock/coral with a friend's horse and a crossbreed was born. It had the strpes of one parent in parts and the pure white fur of the other as well. Then we have the big cats. Tigers and lions can give birth to cross breeds called ligers or tigons.


And I have read that the skunk was in a little boat tied up to the Arc of Noah, following it. It is a joke. :)

#20 M. Partyka

M. Partyka

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 345 posts

Posted 04 March 2008 - 08:34 PM

...St. Gregory of Nyssa never stated, or implied such a theory in his writings and I do not think he would have ever said the speculation you mention "that mankind was created en masse like all the other creatures but one was taken aside and enbreathed with the Holy Spirit who then became Adam our first father".

I agree. This theory is something I've never read in any of the Fathers from the first four centuries. (Nor is the "garments of skin" theory, for that matter.)

Long ago I recall reading somewhere...that mankind was created en masse like all the other creatures but one was taken aside and enbreathed with the Holy Spirit who then became Adam our first father....Adam began alive prior to God giving him the Holy Spirit and thus making him in the image of God. If this is the case it answers the question about who Adam's children married after the fall better than other models. It does however raise some questions about the relationship of Adam and his family both pre and post fall to the other "humans". What did it mean for them when Adam was set apart? What did it mean for them when he fell? Did Adam's line revert "physically" to what they were prior allowing intermarriage with others. Did this intermarriage somehow communicate the "image of Godness" that Adam's line possessed or did that pass to other human's some other way if it did at all?

If one were to explore this approach, I think one would have to posit that all mankind was created (or evolved into beings) with the innate ability to know God, and that the fall wasn't so much a loss of this ability as it was a loss of opportunity. Adam and Eve were taken to Eden and put on the "fast track" to theosis, if you will, but Adam's sinning against God caused himself and Eve to be thrown off the "fast track" and back into the wild world outside of Eden. In a sense, through Adam and Eve, God gave man the opportunity to know Him, but man refused to come to God in God's desired way and in God's desired time. Instead, they tried to bypass God and went after the likeness of God through the forbidden tree, so God threw them out of Eden and said, "I offered you the chance to partake of Me. In my mercy, then, I will come down and partake of you, so that all who wish may partake of Me."

As a sidebar, St. Irenaeus of Lyons writes in his Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching:

12. ...man, was (but) small; for he was a child; and it was necessary that he should grow, and so come to (his) perfection. And, that he might have his nourishment and growth with festive and dainty meats, He prepared him a place better than this world, excelling in air, beauty, light, food, plants, fruit, water, and all other necessaries of life: and its name is Paradise. And so fair and good was this Paradise, that the Word of God continually resorted thither, and walked and talked with the man, figuring beforehand the things that should be in the future, (namely) that He should dwell with him and talk with him, and should be with men, teaching them righteousness. But man was a child, not yet having his understanding perfected; wherefore also he was easily led astray by the deceiver....

14. And Adam and Eve--for that is the name of the woman--were naked, and were not ashamed;for there was in them an innocent and childlike mind, and it was not possible for them to conceive and understand anything of that which by wickedness through lusts and shameful desires is born in the soul. For they were at that time entire, preserving their own nature; since they had the breath of life which was breathed on their creation: and, while this breath remains in its place and power, it has no comprehension and understanding of things that are base. And therefore they were not ashamed, kissing and embracing each other in purity after the manner of children.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users