Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Adam & Eve...

I continue to see posts where people deny the existance of Adam & Eve. Now, as a pagan I do not put much faith in the bible or many of it's teachings. But due to the fact that there are humans here today I have to assume that there was at one point a first couple. I wasn't around then, and never had the chance to ask them what they were called. So, I use the names that history has given them, biblical or not.

Even as a Pagan or Athiest or otherwise non-Christian, why would you assume that Adam & Eve did not exist? Maybe those weren't their names, but if you weren't there to ask then how can you know? Many of the names from Myths (both Christian and non-Christian) are inaccurate but there is no way for us to know which ones are and which ones weren't so why assume the Bible is wrong or right? How do you defend denying that there was a first couple? Or do you just deny that they were named Adam & Eve?

Answer Question
 
SabrinaMBowen

Asked by SabrinaMBowen at 3:53 PM on Jun. 20, 2009 in Religion & Beliefs

Level 40 (122,988 Credits)
Answers (12)
  • I believe in the evolution of man. I don't think the first human were anything we would recognize today. Life branching out from a common ancestor through gradual genetic changes over millions of years...

    IhartU

    Answer by IhartU at 4:02 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

  • While it is reasonable to know that there had to be a first couple, many do see the story of Eden as symbolism, or at least not meant to be taken literally.
    Its not so much that people deny there was a first man and woman, but that instead they deny the Eden story as factual information, believing it to be mere myth/metaphor, rather than literal happenings.
    Some see it merely as the symbol of the imperfectness of man, some believe it to be the literal truth, but we all seem to agree that our species had to start somewhere...
    bandgeek521

    Answer by bandgeek521 at 4:04 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

  • Because the odds of there being one and only one first couple are miniscule. It is more likely that there were several offspring of homo erectus in various locations at the same time. The only way you could call one Adam and Eve is if you could determine which pairing was the first to successfully produce a homo sapiens offspring, but more than likely, there were several preggo mutated homoerectus at the same time.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 4:15 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

  • Adam & Eve as mythological figures were created beings, they cannot be understood in their role as people who literally existed. If you want to discuss actual first people, then, what NotPanicking said.
    nysa00

    Answer by nysa00 at 4:34 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

  • right on
    writeon

    Answer by writeon at 4:53 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

  • Even as a Pagan or Athiest or otherwise non-Christian, why would you assume that Adam & Eve did not exist?


    it's not really "adam and eve" I don't believe in.. because obviously there was a first "human".. however it's the story of adam and eve that is unbelievable for most.. so they deny their (adam and eve's) existence. and replace it with their own ideas of who or how the first person came to be.

    xxhazeldovexx

    Answer by xxhazeldovexx at 10:16 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

  • Maybe those weren't their names, but if you weren't there to ask then how can you know? Many of the names from Myths (both Christian and non-Christian) are inaccurate but there is no way for us to know which ones are and which ones weren't so why assume the Bible is wrong or right? How do you defend denying that there was a first couple? Or do you just deny that they were named Adam & Eve?


     


    the only reason their names are as such is because that was their definition.. not really a name as we view names now a days. There are a lot of reasons why people don't believe them to be the first couple.. namely because of their sons.  I do believe they were the first couple to adopt a more primitive idea of what Christianity would one day become.. and perhaps the first in their area.  However I'm theorizing here..

    xxhazeldovexx

    Answer by xxhazeldovexx at 10:19 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

  • I really don't like to believe in Adam & Eve because I don't want to know that I had sex with someone I was somehow related to. It's also kind of horrific to think their first born either had sex with mom or had sex with dad.
    hepnerlump

    Answer by hepnerlump at 10:34 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

  • 2,500,000 BP to 1,500,000 BP – Oldowan is an anthropological designation for an industry of stone tools used by prehistoric hominines of the Lower Paleolithic. The Oldowan is the very first stone tool assemblage in prehistory.

    1,400,000 BP to 125,000 BP – Acheulean is the name given to an industry of stone tool manufacture associated with prehistoric hominins during the Lower Paleolithic era across Africa and much of Asia and Europe dating from around 1.4 million to 125,000 BP.
    xxhazeldovexx

    Answer by xxhazeldovexx at 10:47 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

  • 300,000 BP to 200,000 BP or 500,000 to 125,000 BP – Clactonian is the name given by archaeologists to an industry of European flint tool manufacture that dates to the early part of the interglacial period known as the Hoxnian, the Mindel-Riss or the Holstein interglacial. Clactonian tools were made by Homo erectus rather than modern humans. The term is sometimes applied to early, crude flint tools from other regions that were made using similar methods.
    xxhazeldovexx

    Answer by xxhazeldovexx at 10:47 PM on Jun. 20, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.
close Cafemom Join now to connect to other members! Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN