God's name for humankind

Post Reply New Topic

In Genesis 1:26-27 it reads:
“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”

The word in Hebrew for man here is אדם "Adam" but from the phrases "and let them have dominion...” and “male and female created he them” it is clear this does not only refer to the first man Adam but to both Adam and Eve (or rather Chavvah) as well as the whole human race.

Strong's numbers classify the Adam in 1:26-27 (and parts of chapter 2) as H120 and the name for the first man Adam as H121. However in the listing for H121 Strong's says “The same as H120”

It would appear then that the Biblical name for humankind is Adam, named after the first man Adam who was created on day six.

But as Paul says,

“For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.”
(1 Corinthians 15:21-22)

And

“And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.”
(1 Corinthians 15:45)

So those who accept the salvation in Christ would, although still physically and genealogically from Adam, be of the race of Christ Jesus.

if its any consulation iamnotaparakeet, i like the books of the bible that were left out. especially the book of adam&eve

http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/freebook ... vetoc.html

Similarly I liked reading the book of Enoch to an extant, but after reading about 450 foot tall giants eating men and dinosaurs I couldn't stomach it.

Most of the Apocrypha and Pseudopigrapha was written after the time of the Greek conquest of Israel by the Hellenistic Jews, probably trying to compete with Greek stories as to who's the best seller. I don't go for that kind of stuff.

On the other hand, Genesis predates Moses as evidenced by the numerous colophon phrases starting off a new section with "elleh toledot" meaning "these are the written records of". So I prefer the authentic to the counterfeit. That's just a personal preference, glad you found something you like.

God's name for humankind?

I think 'f****d' describes us well.

Opinion noted.

I find most religious texts difficult to stomach. They are nothing more than cultural stories used to teach one another modern perceptions of morality and the world around them. Which to me, does not take away from the meaning of said texts.

Most including the book of Mormon, the Qu'ran, epic of Gilgamesh, are either too far fetched or documented counterfeits.

what about that person living to be 900+ in the bible? and the sea parting, elijah being carried into heaven by a firey chariot, the destruction of sodom & gammorah, that dude beaing eaten by a whale and living to tell about it, jesus walking on water, / the miracles he did ?

would that not be considerd far fetched? what makes you think any of those things are more true than anything in an apocryphal book?

those things mentioned in the bible might not be as dramatic as 400 foot tall giants etc.. but still is hard too swallow none the less

you do know that noahs flood story was ripped of from the epic of gilgamesh right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgamesh_flood_myth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziusudra

if you seriously think the jewish people invented the flood story, you are seriously mistaken

Average age before the Flood was 930 years. There was an article on Physorg.com about maximized end caps genes, without disease or pianos falling on people it is theoretically possible to live 1000 years. The Bible doesn't go beyond that limit, whereas the Sumerian kings list does.



And the Jordan river too. Direct nonnormative acts of God.

,

And Enoch is the other guy.

,,

Is destruction of cities impossible or am I missing something.

,

That has even happened recently to a sailor, why is it impossible in the past.



He's God the Son, so what's the problem here.



Historical and factual errors giving a lack of integrity to the authors of those other texts.



At 450 foot tall the blood pressure would be enormous. A cut on the foot could kill. The action of clotting factors would be too slow and too weak.



Wrong. The Sumerian ark was a 7 story tall cube and from its description was not sea worthy. The Biblical one has been shown to be mathematically optimum for sea performance. The Flood legend in Sumer is a corruption of the true account as are the other 269 world wide flood legends.

No the account of the Flood is 452 years older than Jacob. I don't believe it to be some Jewish story, so you are both correct and mistaken.

well as seeing is how the sumerian flood story was the first told i dont see how it can be corrupted since every civilization after them copied there story, and just put there own cultural twists and turns in it

I believe you cannot see how.

i can see how. i am trying to see how you think the bible is just the truth when clearly, some of its storys are more than likely a fabrication and ripped off from earlier peoples

It's called "historicity".

I thought the Bible was intended as a moral guide, not a historical one? I do not believe that stories like Noah's Ark and Adam and Eve were meant to be taken literally.

The Bible is a historical document. There are different parts to the Bible, like the letters, which may be taken as moral guidance but most of it is not. Your opinion is noted.