subject: Who Was the First Man? [print this page] Who Was the First Man? Who Was the First Man?
Bible scholars and theologians call him Adam. Scientists and evolutionists call him "Australopithecus". The question remains, who was the first man?
Its possible that there is an explanation that allows both to be right.
The only "man" recognized as such in the bible is anyone who is a descendant of Adam.
To an evolutionist the term "man" applies to anyone who is a bipedal hominid, who uses tools, language, and is intelligent.
To identify who the first man was we first have to answer the question, "according to whose definition".
Could it be that the scientific form of man existed for millennia on this earth before Adam, and that Adam, spoken of by the Bible in the Garden of Eden and afterward, was not the same creature that our science books call "man"?
Could it also be that the conflict between creationism and evolution is simply a matter of definitions, and it depends on whose definition you accept?
Adam had many times the longevity of "primitive" man. We have a similar trait. Our average lifespan is in the 70's. Primitive man of 10,000 years ago had an average lifespan of only 35-40 years, according to archeologists.
"Modern man" as we know him may not have existed until around 5000 years ago, after Noah's flood, when the descendants of Adam (and Noah) mixed with this primitive man who was already here, and created a new species? That new species is us, or "modern" man. This would explain why the life spans came down in discrete "steps" in Genesis 11:10 to 32, from Shem to Abraham. Every three generations the lifespan dropped drastically.
Biblical scholars have talked of a "divine spark" that God put in Adam that is present in everyone who is a descendent of him. Genesis calls it the "Breath of Life". The "primitive man" that our science books speak of, didn't have this. It is very possible that the "divine spark" is a genetic signature that becomes a part of everyone that is a descendant of Adam, and that it will only be discovered when we are able to fully understand the entire genetic code of the human race.
If we take this view all kinds of possibilities open up and some of the greatest mysteries of the Bible are "solved".
We now have an explanation for where Cain's wife came from. The man Cain, that the Bible refers to, took a wife from among the creatures that our science books call "man". These creatures looked very much like modern man but lacked the genetic "Breath of Life" that God implanted in Adam, and weren't recognized as "man" by the Bible.
Stated another way, when the Bible says Adam was the first man, it is using God's definition of man as created in the garden, and is correct, by definition. When our children read about "early man" in their science books, and those books say that the first man began about two million years ago, they are accepting science's definition of "man", not God's.
Why is this important for today's generation? It means that after 4000 years of mixing of the genes that there is probably no one left on the planet who doesn't have at least some of the genes of a man that the Bible calls Adam, and therefore, as a creature with a divine origin, is eligible to be called a "son of God", and to inherit a place in God's kingdom. According to John in chapter 1:12 "But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God".
The saddest thing that could happen is for someone to not claim that inheritance.
