- The Preadamite Theory: Adam is the ancestor of the white race only. Other races, or perhaps just blacks are descended from Preadamites.
- The Local Flood Theory: The Flood of Genesis was local and Noah's family were the only survivors within the Flood plane. This does not rule out other survivors outside the Flood region.
- The Traditional Theory: Everyone descends from Adam. Everyone died in the Flood except for Noah's family. Therefore, everyone descends from Noah. Whites from Japheth, Near Easterners from Shem, blacks and Asians from Ham.
- Modified Theories: These are modified forms of the Traditional theory. They believe that everyone descends from Noah but adhere to a different scheme of descent.
Problems with the Preadamite Theory
The Preadamite Theory seems to have several theological problems as well as with anthropology. By denying that anyone of any race has direct descent from Adam essentially denies that they are in fact human. There are many verses in the Bible that suggest that Adam and Eve are mankind's universal parents (Gen. 3:20, Rom. 5:12, Acts 17:26, 1 Cor. 15:22). Furthermore, if we conclude that a race such as the blacks is not Adamic, then we are suggesting that they are not really sinners because humanity inherits our sinful nature through Adam. This theory is expounded on in Adamites and Preadamites by John Roberts. He combines the Preadamite Theory with the local flood theory that I will mention next. While he makes interesting points, I find the theory untenable with the Christian faith.
Problems with the Local Flood Theory
Whether or not the Flood of Genesis was global or confined to a local region it seems impossible that there could have been survivors other than Noah's family. The idea that there may have been other survivors besides Noah's family is easier to allow than the idea of Preadamite humans. There is no passage in the Bible that explicitly says that everyone is descended from Noah. However there are passages that seem to suggest that only Noah's family survived the Flood (1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-9, 2 Peter 3:5). Another difficulty is that many nations all over the world have some sort of Flood account in their ancient traditions. I suppose I'm more open to this idea than the last one, but I still don't think that it is accurate.
Problems with the Traditional View
The traditional view is Biblical because it teaches that all men descend from Adam and Noah. It also enjoys a long line of proponents from Church history. However there are some difficulties with the way that people view the descent of man from Noah. As I stated before this view holds that whites descend from Japheth, blacks, Amerindians, and East Asians descend from Ham, and Near/Middle Easterners descend from Shem. A variation of this theory states that East Asians descend from Shem rather than Ham. Some concerns that I have with this theory are:
- Many of the traits that describe Shemites such as fair and ruddy (reddish) usually apply to white Indo-Europeans, not contemporary Middle Easterners.
- It seems odd that Ham would be the ancestor of so many people. Sub-Saharan Africans (blacks), North Africans, East Asians, Amerindians, Dravidians, and Australian/New Zealand aboriginals would comprise a disproportionate percentage of the earth's people.
- Modern genetic evidence that measures genetic distance suggests that Africans and Asians are more distant from each other than whites and Asians. This suggests that Ham couldn't be the direct ancestor to them both.
- Some nations that are thought to descend from Shem or Ham are thought to be Indo-European according to secular history. These include the Persians (from Elam), the Egyptians (from Mizraim) and possibly the Assyrians (from Asshur).
There is also evidence that the white race is partially descended from pre-modern members of the Near/Middle East. One apocryphal verse that fascinates me is 1 Maccabees 12:21 which says "It is found in writing, that the Spartans and Jews are brethren, and come out of the generation of Abraham." This would be an interesting twist to the traditional understanding of the origins of race. Interestingly enough, while New Advent believes that all people descend from Noah, the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 represents only the Caucasian nations: "Nor can the distribution of the nations as described in the tenth chapter of Genesis be appealed to, seeing that this section does not enumerate all races of the earth, but confines itself probably to the Caucasian." These are interesting points to ponder. Let me know if anyone out there has any opinions that could help clear the matter up for me.
3 comments:
Its really difficult finding the true origin of the white,but more easy when we apply wisdom to knowledge and asking simple questions.
(1).who are the fathers to Adam and Eve
(2)can two white man give birth to black.
It is easy to answer this questions by psychic perseption.
If the bible clearly ststes that Adam was created by God in his image and likeness,it therefore means man was d birth result of Gods word. Now,we find out from scriptural knowledge that the sin of man led to so many curses that were unleashed on man by God.one of which was the curse of leprosy.this i believe is on of the cleatest results to tracing properly the white origin
II KINGS 5:27 therfore the leprosy of naaman shall cling to you and your DESCENDANTS FOREVER. and he went out from his presence leprous, as WHITE AS SNOW.
I read a book about a year ago called "After the Flood" by a man named Bill Cooper.
It was so good that I read the entire thing in one setting.
Mr. Cooper has devoted his life to seeking out the lineage documents of royal bloodlines in Europe.
If his conclusions are true...many of the royal families are able to trace their lineage directly back to Noah...(mostly through Japeth, though if I remember right, Cooper concluded that the Celts were decendents of Shem.)
Cooper attributes the lack of knowledge about these lineages to a general bias against Christianity in the relevent fields.
Post a Comment