Who's first adam or eve? were they apes?

Answer 1

god made adam from the dust of the ground, so...

man from dirt; woman from man

adam first, eve second

they were fully human and fully mature from the point that both were created

there was no monkey's uncle; peeps are peeps and monkeys are monkeys, and neither have ever been or ever will be anything else

they didn't evolve from anything else and they won't evolve into anything else; people will always be people, monkeys will always be monkeys, fish will always be fish, cats will always be cats, finches will always be finches

and no one has any credible evidence to the contrary

science (and most scienctists forget, while non-scientists are unaware) comes in two forms: historical science and observational science

the former is science that attempts to interpret events of the past that were not observed directly

the latter is science that deals with the things that we can and do observe in the present

in all of our observations, we have always and only observed that life comes from life...and that life always comes from the same kind of life

in other words, we have observed gazillions of times that fish always have fish babies, people always have people babies, cats always have cat babies, bacteria breed nothing but more bacteria (with the exception of when a virus takes control of their machinery and injects its own rna reproducing another virus), horses have horse babies, whales have whale babies (except when they breed with dolphins producing wholphins, but they are from the same original kind), and on and on it goes

no one has ever observed one kind of life changing into another kind of life...

if that observation ever is made then we can revisit this discussion; until then, those that claim common ancestors for monkeys and men are barking at the moon

xoloxolox asked a cute question above (she thought it was cute anyway :-)

cain's wife was his sister...very simple, eh

"incest" has only become an issue in the last ~3500yrs or thereabouts

prior to that time the human genome was still robust enough to deal with "inbreeding" without the ill effects noted today (ie, serious birth defects, pronounced propensities for disease, etc)

we think of "incest" as something horrific today simply because we have been culturally and legally conditioned to do so, and because of the observed consequences in more modern offspring (sa, paranthesis in the paragraph above)

but it was not always so; legislation appeared among the hebrews/jews in the time of moses (one of the 600+ ordinances given to moses by god in addition to the 10 commandments on mt sinai)

similar legislation begins to appear among other peoples and cultures of the region at roughly the same time

in the beginning god made all things perfect, including the human genome; it was only after the sin of man that things began to go awry

however, even then the human genome remained fairly robust for about another 1500yrs (the human genome along with lots of other things began to become more disorderly more rapidly after the worldwide flood about 4500yrs ago)

the human genome continues to decline today; we are not improving as mr darwin would have us believe but rather going in precisely the opposite direction

so why are we living longer today than 500 or 1000 yrs ago? (first, this assumes that we are, and in some ways that statistics can be viewed, we are, on average) but the only reason that we are living longer is thanks to science and technology

we are discovering, inventing more devices and medicines that help to keep us alive longer on average

(the question of QUALITY of life in terms of physical fitness shall be reserved for an entirely different discussion)

at any rate, while biomedical devices and medicines are allowing us to live longer on average, the human genome is still in decline

the mutational load (the number of mutations/mistakes/errors accumulating, growing in the human genome) is increasing rather than decreasing, the number of diseases and pathogens that we need to battle against is increasing rather than decreasing

we're going the wrong direction for evolution

we're also going the wrong direction to be able to marry close relatives, as was once possible, and quite common...

even abraham was married to his sister (half sis)

in today's terms, noah's grandhcildren would have faced essentially the same dilemma...they had to marry their sister/brothers or 1st cousins

but at that time it just wasn't an issue yet...no problem

then we have the response from "secretsauce": cute, and very authoritative SOUNDING

what he fails to mention is the number of ASSUMPTIONS involved in the line of reasoning he offers

if you do google "mitochondrial eve," you will come across a very interesting article concerning our miscalculation of the mutational rate, finding that it is actually (or at least has been at times, be very careful of "uniformitarianism") considerably faster than we had assumed (now we are dealing with OBSERVATIONS rather than assumptions)

using the data, rather than ignoring it to preserve the prevailing paradigm, they recalculated the age of mitochodrial eve to be...

~6000 - 6500yrs

isn't that interesting...

the author of that article apparently rejected the findings, but at least had the courage to report them, albeit with all of the evolutionary spin that could be mustered

this doesn't prove that "mitochondrial eve" came on the scene ~6000yrs ago

what it does show is that we that work with the sciences often make erroneous assumptions that lead to erroneous results, but we love to shout with authority that our findings are solid :-)

we all work with the same evidence, but we interpret it differently, largely based on our preconceptions (scientists are not purely objective; we all have preconceptions)

btw -- one of my areas of graduate work was molecular genetics; my special areas of interest are molecular virology (ie, SARS, bird flu, etc) and bringing affordable and effective biopesticides (as opposed to chemical pesticides) to reality...not much progress yet on the latter, unfortunately, nor as much as we'd like on the avian flu

and finally in response to chivasbaby g's response...

it seems that she is saying that dinos did not come before man

this is probably more an issue of semantics on her part than egregious error but it doesn't look good for the good guys

dinosaurs did come before man: they were created on the same day (except for aquatic dinos that were created the day before on day 5) but man was created last; after all of the domesticable cattle, creeping things, and beasts (including dinos) were created, after everything else was ready, then god created man, the crowning jewel of his creation, actually the very purpose for which the universe and all things therein were created

man is not some non-descript, unimportant, random, accidental bag of genes; we are the reason for the existence of all things within the material realm and some (ie, angels) outside of it

back to your original question: adam was first, eve was second, neither was an ape or the descendant of anything apelike or anything else

they were human from the beginning...and their descendants will be human to the end :-)

Answer 2

According to the theory of evolution, Adam and Eve ARE apes because all humans came from apes. But if you look into the Bible, Adam came first and then Eve came forth from Adam's rib bone.

Answer 3

This question was answered very well by some people. IT was Adam first because it says in the Bible and the Bible doesnt lie. Eve was made from Adam's ribs.. you should read Genesis to understand the creation of the world and its humans. There is no such thing as dinosaurs first of us being apes or the big bang theory.. that is ALLL wrong..dnnt believe the crowd all the time.. believe the Word.. its allways right

Answer 4

Adam was. God took a rib from Adam to produce Eve. No they were not apes, they were human beings. If we originate from Adam and Eve, how come we're not apes? How come there are still apes around?

Answer 5

Adam was created first. We know this because Eve was made from one of his rib bones.

Also, according to creationism (Adam and Eve), evolution never occured. That means that Adam and Eve were not apes, they were the first humans. I think you get the idea that they might be apes from evolution, but these things are unrelated.

Answer 6

Adam in Hebrew means earth . so out of the earth was Adam formed.That was the initial conditons of Human formation. Animal were formed also similarly out of the ground.
First man was the Initial conditions for Human life.
For the continuance of Human life out of the side of man was woman surgically created. It was easy just alter the dna a little .So man now had a help mate he could identify with. He may have found apes which were similarly created but apes were very small and did not match his stature or language .He did not know it but he realld needed a woman.So Human owe their existance not to apelike creatures but to actually a woman . The word in Hebrew refered to Eve and that creation was called eve because she would be the mother of all living.

Now whether apes evolved from one inch tall monkeys or not .that belongs to the theory of evolution. that their problem.And why apes dont speak proper English ; well that could have been a school problem.May be Darwin resolved that question.!

Answer 7

God first created Adam, and no, he wasn't an Ape, he was a man. All the animals were already created the previous day. After God created Adam, he pulled a rib out and made Eve from it.

Answer 8

Adam was first, because Eve came from one of Adam's ribs. The Bible say no, they were human. Noah put the apes on the ark.

Answer 9

Adam was first and then Eve was made FROM Adam.. Were they apes? If you believe in the Bible, they were NOT apes.

Answer 10

Adam was first and according to the bible then God took the ribs from Adam and put them into Eve. If you believe in god that they weren't apes. If you dont beleive in god then you believe in Evolution. There is no definite answer whether they were apes are not.

Answer 11

Adam came first. No, they weren't apes. God made Eve out of Adam's rib.