If you deny that the first man was created before the first woman, and if you deny that the first woman came from the man (not from an existing animal or human-like creature), you undermine the biblical doctrine of marriage and ultimately the authority of the Old and New Testaments.
Through Adam, death came into the world. Jesus came and demonstrated He has power over death. Thus, those who are in Christ, will be saved and death will have no sting.
The first woman carried a lot on her shoulders—by encouraging her husband to rebel against God, she helped bring suffering and ruin upon her children and all their descendants. Yet she found hope in the same promised Seed that we all look to.
Some have claimed that the Bible doesn’t necessarily mean what it says in Genesis 2:17, since Adam and Eve didn’t die the moment they ate. Adam and Eve died —as will all the rest of us for our sins, which is all the more reason to receive Christ and be saved from death.
It is likely that Adam had to name only a couple of thousand proto-species—a task which could easily have been achieved in a few hours. Assuming Adam had to name 2,500 proto-species (genera), it would have taken him approximately three hours and 45 minutes to complete the task.
Adam and the Genome illustrates that, as new scientific data accumulate, evolutionists find new and more nuanced ways to contradict the Bible.
Genetics confirms the recent, supernatural creation of Adam and Eve and refutes the evolutionary narrative on human origins.
Of all of the claims of biological evolution perhaps none is more repugnant to conservative Christians than the bestial origin of man.
People make the claim that it is impossible to get 7 billion descendants from two people. In kindness, where does the Bible say this is impossible?
Because of the impact of evolution on the theological world today, an increasing number of evangelical scholars are denying Adam’s historicity.
The recent publication of Adam and the Genome illustrated how evolutionists find new and more nuanced ways to contradict the biblical account.
Many people think of the forbidden fruit as an apple. Is that what the Bible says?
Does it really matter what we believe about Adam? Yes it does! There are enormous moral and spiritual implications of these truths.
Eve found hope in the same promised Seed that we all look to.
Therefore, it is claimed, the Bible does not deal with the issue of the age of mankind or even how man came into existence.
Many women have the impression that the Genesis account of Adam and Eve imposed a humiliating, subservient role on women. Is this really the case?
Due to a mixture of biblical and secular reasons, an increasing number of evangelical scholars are beginning to deny the supernatural creation of Adam.
The issue is not whether a person can be a Christian and believe in evolution but what one has to concede theologically in order to hold to their belief.
The Bible is full of historical accounts, but they leave out fascinating details that we’d love to know more about. Is it okay to look further?
In secular culture it is common to view the biblical history of Adam as a story, myth, or a parable but this is now also becoming the standard interpretation for many within the evangelical community.PDF Download
Dr. Terry Mortenson, AiG-U.S., responds to a recent blog post by Dr. Peter Enns that strongly accused Ken Ham of teaching obvious error and misleading Christians.
This article reveals how young-earth creationists have concluded the approximate age of Adam and to explain the reason for a 6,000 year range between both groups.PDF Download
Genesis 1 and 2 seem to indicate different times for the creation of Eve. Was Eve created on Day Six or not?
Did God contradict Himself concerning what He said Adam could eat?
This paper will show that Christian professor Daniel Brannan’s arguments are based on faulty premises regarding Adam’s constitutional nature, the nature of Adam’s perfection and Adam’s free choice.PDF Download
The June 2011 issue of Christianity Today spends a lot of ink searching for the historical Adam or explaining why we shouldn’t expect there to be one.
Darrel Falk of BioLogos recently presented an article proclaiming the coming acceptance of evolution among evangelical Christians. He intends to fight against the biblical idea of a young earth.
There has been a lot of talk recently about a New Perspective on Paul (NPP). Writers previously thought to be evangelicals have used this new idea to open an assault on Adam and Eve.
Some have claimed that the Bible doesn’t necessarily mean what it says in Genesis 2:17, since Adam and Eve didn’t die the moment they ate.
Often, people say that they can’t believe the serpent in Genesis 3 spoke because they claim animals don’t speak.
Why would God tell Adam and Eve to “replenish” the earth in Genesis 1:22 if they were the first humans?
“Why is Adam translated either man or mankind and not Adam?”
How could Adam have named millions of different species on Day 6 if it was only 24 hours? This is a common objection to a straightforward view of Genesis 1.
Many evangelical Christians don’t realize the importance of the Genesis record and its implications on other areas and doctrines of the Bible.
Despite the large number of cartoons and the almost universally accepted tradition, the Bible does not say that Eve ate an apple. Why then is it so popular to believe that she did?
Did Adam have a belly-button? I believe we really have an answer to that, and we can say, 'No — Adam didn't. Neither did Eve.'
Adam's rib is not a topic you'd expect to be discussed in courses promoting evolution. So I was intrigued to read in Discover magazine that the subject of Adam's rib arose repeatedly.
This highlights the uncertainties and complexities of attempts to reconstruct the past. It is at present just as consistent with the data to state that the real Adam and Eve lived in the same place.