Welcome to Gaia! ::

I can definitely understand where you're coming from. I agree that a lot of biblical stories are up for interpretation, and as for whether or not they actually happened in the way the testament states.

My belief has been this: Adam and Eve lived inside a little bubble. They were cut off from the rest of the world, but they certainly were not alone. Now, whether or not they existed whilst homoerectus was off doing his thing, I don't really know. My belief is that this "neandrethal" people speak of is just a primitive person. Obviously through time the human race has changed, that has been proven, but what this "sub human" actually is is probably just a person belonging to a nomadic tribe of the east. (I believe natives probably existed even before Adam and Eve.)

Now someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't it somewhere in Genesis explain that Cane went east to find a wife? Would that not prove there were people outside of Eden?

That's an interpretation I've never heard before, though I have heard something along the lines of "these were the first people to create actual civilization, communities rather than just collections of individuals." Intriguing, and I think I like it.

If this was the case then there still would have once had to be a first person.

I am the type of person who tends to read the bible relativly literally so I believe that Adam and Eve were the first people although as @severus said they probably had more children then Cain and Able. Regarding the lifespans, they probably calculated years differently back then. As for the other interpretations, they do seem plausible and give an interesting perspective on the Bible.

Firstly, there would have been enough genetic variance just the same way when the 12 sons of Jacob turned into many thousands of people from the time they entered Egypt till 400 years latter when they left Egypt. Surly they did live longer back then (the oldest man in the bible is almost 1000 years old) and the reason we no longer live so long is because, if I remember correctly, at one point G-d changed the age limit to 120 because He no longer wanted people living for such long periods of time because that made them more like Him. If they lived so long back then, it would not have been a problem to have so many children, and even currently it is a tradition among Jews (mainly Orthodox) to have many children so I am assuming they had way more back then. Even if many children died, many still would have survived. In the Bible they mainly only mention the males who were born (which they probably don't mention all of), so who knows how many females they would have had.

Ahh... interpretive bible study.

mrgreen

The beautiful thing about Judaism is that you're allowed to interpret the bible so it makes sense.

We don't just blindly follow aspects of creationism without hearing the side of evolution and how it can work with The Creation. It's all interpretive.

Were Cain and Abel real? or was it a metaphor on criminal responsibility and anger management?

What exactly does Psalm 137 mean? and how does that play towards forgiveness and healing the world, or should we really go out and kill our enemies children?

I mean ask a rabbi how we got across The Red Sea in the Exodus and they will more than likely explain, "We didn't, we made it across a swamp full of reeds, and the chariots couldn't make it across the soft ground."

In short, if you can find a modern explanation for your bible, then awesome, share your thoughts. If you can't... well that's good too.

I mean, I still can't figure out how Noah dropped the Ostriches in Australlia, the lemurs in Madagascar, and the polar bears in Canada before landing on that Mountain in Turkey.

Adam and Eve, if two people, would create a genetic bottleneck. Noah also creates a genetic bottleneck. It would be rather impossible for a species to survive two genetic bottlenecks. If Adam and Eve were not individuals, then there'd be enough genetic variance by the time of Noah, that even though the gene pools were severely reduced (science says only 33 women were alive, capable of breeding, at one point) they would still be able to avoid the recessive genetics of inbreeding.

Edit: On a slightly random note, I finished reading Genesis last night. First time ever completing it.

So are we inferring that deformation and other health risks such as hemophilia became a punishment for incest, and that Cain was free to be incestual without consequence because the Torah wasn't around? If that's what you're saying, that's fine, I just want to make sure I have it straight.

You're right that far back enough, there would have to have been an original person, but I believe that evolution sort of took it's course until homo whoever found that they could reproduce. Obviously not something you could find in a text book during those times. (I'm not explaining that well, I know.)

I know my view isn't commonly shared with literal interpreters, but it simply makes no sense that it would have said Cain went east to find a wife if he just had a sister chillin' near by. (If the story is indeed literal, or otherwise.)

Also, like Divash said, I've heard Adam and Eve's story interpreted as a metaphor that symbolized the beginning of civilization, not the beginning of mankind. This also makes sense seeing as Cain's seed would eventually become the first agriculturalists, or at least so I hear.

That brings me to Noah, whose family supposedly repopulated this entire earth. I simply can't believe it was that simple. It could be said that the flood destroyed only the KNOWN world. This would basically be the Mid-East and Asia Minor...Possibly Africa, but I don't really know.

Just something to think about.