Skip to main content

Timeline for Were Adam and Eve the first?

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

12 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 29, 2011 at 12:07 comment added Caleb <overly chatty / not related comments removed> If you guys want to carry on a debate about what comprises 'scholarly' please take it to chat. Much of what was here had nothing to do with this answer.
Sep 29, 2011 at 12:02 comment added Caleb @SonicTheHedgehog: This answer covers material through several chapters of Genesis and reasons both from what is and isn't said in those chapters. It is unreasonable to quote 5 chapters in an answer but quite reasonable to make a general argument for an interpretation of a section this large while leaving the reading up to the user.
Sep 28, 2011 at 19:12 comment added Phonics The Hedgehog I suggest that you edit your answser to show some bible verses. It is not a good answer if you just say that Adam and Eve were first ever people. You cannot prove that. Your answering may have been plausible, but without using Bible verses, it would be foolish to try to argue with others based on you opinion.
Sep 28, 2011 at 13:50 comment added Narnian It seems that the only evidence acceptable to you is an explicit statement in the Bible for that question. If none exists, that doesn't mean there is no answer. And just because the answer does not have that, does not mean it isn't true. Still, the answer is plausible, reasonable, and tenable. I wonder what would qualify as a "scholarly" answer to you. If there is no explicit statement in the Bible, then this is the best answer.
Sep 28, 2011 at 13:34 comment added Narnian Whatever... It's a tenable, plausible, reasonable explanation.
Sep 28, 2011 at 13:19 comment added Narnian If the Bible does not explicitly answer a particular question, we are left to a little speculation. The question is whether or not speculation is reasonable. In this case, I think it is quite reasonable.
Sep 28, 2011 at 13:16 comment added Paul To speculate is to speculate, regardless of what your speculation is. You can speculate all you want, but you shouldn't use that as grounds for future speculation and certainly not as an argument, as you did.
Sep 28, 2011 at 12:57 comment added Narnian To speculate that they did not have other children is more untenable than to speculate that they did, since Genesis 5 does clearly name 1) Seth and 2-3) other sons and 4-5) daughters, not to mention 6) Cain and 7) Abel.
Sep 28, 2011 at 12:54 comment added Paul Just one example: you first say that Adam could have had other children besides, just because the Bible doesn't explicitly deny that. You then later use that assumption as fact when you say this: "So, when the Bible mentions Cain's fear of other people, it is referring to other sons and daughters of Adam".
Sep 28, 2011 at 12:31 comment added Narnian What are you referring to as speculation?
Sep 28, 2011 at 12:21 comment added Paul Speculation is not exactly what I would call credible or scholarly.
Sep 28, 2011 at 12:11 history answered Narnian CC BY-SA 3.0