Title: Re: Two Adams??
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Baha'i Studies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 16:19:54 EST
To: Baha'i Studies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Two Adams??
In a message dated 10/27/03 11:15:21 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A friend has
, November 03, 2003 9:49 AM
To: Baha'i Studies
Subject: Re: Two Adams??
Dear Susan,
I apologize for being so far behind in my reading. Thanks for your
insights. Would you please clarify? Are you saying that the Adam that
symbolizes the first human in an evolutionary is also the same man who
In a message dated 11/3/03 7:47:36 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are you saying that the Adam that
symbolizes the first human in an evolutionary is also the same man who is
understood to be a Manifestation (the first?) of God?
Dear Jeanne,
The term Adam literally
P.S. For Susan B. Don't Jews see
themselves as 'white folks'?
Yes, I should have written gentiles
which would have been the more common referent. As a Native Studies
professor, I slipped into the referent used in Indian country from non-Indians.
Within the Jewish community, non-Jews are
Re: Two Adams??She seems to think that she saw it in an article in the
Baha'i Studies Journal and that the statement was attributed to Abd'ul-
Baha. That wouldn't happen to ring any bells for you, would it?
Dear Jeanne,
The only reference i know to *two* Adams is from the New Testament where
The 10,000 to 100,000 year mentioned by the Master seems to indicate the
beginning of human race around that time in my opinion.
Aside from being a confirmation of current scientific thinking, does it
matter, from a scientific point of view, when the Master said that the human
race started?
Susan,
I wrote:
Aside from being a confirmation of current scientific thinking, does it matter,
from a scientific point of view, when the Master said that the human race
started?
You responded:
I suspect that the reason 'Abdu'l-Baha gave two figures is because He was signaling
the fact He
The origin of H. sapiens has not yet reached an overwhelming consensus,
and the answer depends to some extent on which group of researchers
you happen to sample. The multiregional evolution model proposes an
earlier origin for H. sapiens than the Eve or Out-of-Africa model. One
of the
The 10,000 to 100,000 year mentioned by the Master seems to indicate the beginning of
human race around that time in my opinion.
Aside from being a confirmation of current scientific thinking, does it matter, from a
scientific point of view, when the Master said that the human race started?
If you accept the evidence for the Eve or the out of Africa theory,
science has already confirmed the origin of our present species 100,000
years ago.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The 10,000 to 100,000 year mentioned by the Master seems to
indicate the beginning of human race around that time in
If you accept the evidence for the Eve or the out of Africa theory, science
has already confirmed the origin of our present species 100,000 years ago.
Dear Marlene,
I think even without the 'Eve' theory Homo Sapiens are supposed to emerge
about 100,000 years ago aren't they?
The Agricultral
Dear Susan You're right. I have seen what you say about the age of this
world, but I couldn't find an answer to this Word of `Abdu'l-Baha about `ten
thousand years'. Could you look at it in Makatib or second volume of
Ma'idih (vol. 2, chapter 35)? (you can find it in both books)
Dear Faruq,
A friend has mentioned that she seems to remember reading something from
either Shoghi Effendi or Abdu'l-Baha where he stated that the Adam of the
Garden of Eden was not the same Adam who was the Manifestation of God.
Dear Jeanne,
I thought I'd answer this post earlier, but for some reason
Yes, you are right, we are all the same "species" Homo sapiens, which I
think is what you meant. Races are actually subspecies in terms of
classification. Whether or not we are all descended from Eve remains
unclear, despite its popularity in the mass media. Scientific
consensus is not
14 matches
Mail list logo
