http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=157
How Long Were Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden?
Q.
On occasion, those who defend the concept of an old Earth suggest that
it is impossible to know how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden of
Eden and that untold years may have elapsed during that time period. Is
this a possibility? How long were Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden?
A.
The suggestion that millions or billions of years may have passed
during the time Adam and Eve lived in the Garden of Eden is a common
ploy of those who, like progressive creationists and theistic
evolutionists, advocate an ancient Earth. However, it is nothing but
another failed attempt to try to insert vast ages of
geologic/evolutionary time into the biblical record. Consider, in this
regard, two popular arguments that frequently are offered in support of
such a concept.
First, one theistic evolutionist, John N. Clayton, has suggested that
since a part of God’s curse on Eve was that He was going to
multiply her pain in childbirth (Genesis 3:16), she
must
have given birth to numerous children in the garden, or else God’s
curse would have meant nothing to her. How could God “multiply”
something if she never had experienced it in the first place?
Furthermore, Clayton has lamented, rearing children is a process that
requires considerable time, thereby allowing for the possibility that
Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden for an extended period prior to
being evicted after their sin. As Clayton has written: “Every evidence
we have biblically indicates that mankind’s beginning in the Garden of
Eden
was not a short period which involved one man and one woman” (1980, 7[1]:5, emp. added).
The second argument (which is somewhat related to the first) suggests that Adam and Eve
must
have been in the garden for quite some time because after they left, it
was said of Cain that “he builded a city” (Genesis 4:17). To quote
Clayton, that would be something that “you cannot do with you and your
wife” (7[1]:5). In other words, Cain had to have a large enough family
to assist him in building “a city.” That, suggests Clayton, would have
taken a lot of time.
Mr. Clayton is completely in error when he states that “every evidence
we have biblically indicates that mankind’s beginning in the Garden of
Eden was not a short period which involved one man and one woman.” The
fact is,
every evidence we have biblically proves conclusively that man and woman could not have been in the garden for very long. Consider the following.
First, regardless of what defenders of an ancient Earth may
wish
were true, the simple fact of the matter is that the Bible sets an
outer limit on the amount of time that man could have lived in the
Garden of Eden. Genesis 5:5 states clearly that “
all the days that Adam lived were
930 years.”
We know, of course, that “days” and “years” already were being counted
by the time of Adam’s creation because in Genesis 1:14 (day four of the
Creation week) God mentioned both in His discussion of their
relationship to the heavenly bodies. Therefore, however long Adam and
Eve may have been in the garden, one thing is certain: they were not
there for any time period that exceeded Adam’s life span of 930 years.
But there is additional information that must be considered as well.
Genesis 4:25 explains that Seth was born after Cain slew Abel. Since the
biblical account makes it clear that Seth was born outside the garden,
and since Genesis 5:3 informs us that Adam was
130 years old when Seth was born, it is obvious that
Adam and Eve could not have been in the Garden of Eden any longer than 130 years!
Second, surely it is not inconsequential that
all the children of Adam and Eve mentioned in the Bible were born
outside the Garden of Eden.
Not one conception, or birth, is mentioned as having occurred while Adam and Eve lived in the garden (see Genesis 4:1 for the first mention of any conception or birth—only
after the couple’s expulsion from Eden). Follow closely the importance and logic of this argument, which may be stated as follows.
One of the commands given to Adam and Eve was that they “be fruitful
and multiply, and fill the Earth” (Genesis 1:28). [Interestingly, Isaiah
would say many years later that God created the Earth “to be inhabited”
(Isaiah 45:18).] In other words, Adam and Eve were commanded to
reproduce.
Now, what is sin? Sin is: (a)
doing what God said
not to do; or (b)
not doing what God said
to do.
Up until the time that Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 3:6), had they sinned? No, they
still were in a covenant relationship with God and everything was
perfect. Since that is the case, the only conclusion that can be drawn
is that Adam and Eve were doing what God had commanded them to
do—reproducing. Yet, I repeat, the only conceptions and births of which
we have any record occurred
outside the garden! In other words, apparently Adam and Eve were not even in the garden long enough for Eve to conceive, much less give birth.
Third, while the Bible does not provide a
specific time
regarding how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden, it could not have
been very long because Christ Himself, in referring to the curse of
death upon the human family as a result of its sinful rebellion against
God, specifically stated that the devil “was a murderer
from the beginning”
(John 8:44). [Of interest is the fact that in Luke 11:45-52, the
account is recorded of the Lord rebuking the Jews of His day. He charged
them with following in the footsteps of their ancestors. He foretold
the destruction that was yet to befall them. And, He announced that upon
them would come “the blood of all the prophets, which was shed
from the foundation of the world.” Then, with emphatic linguistic parallelism typical of Hebrew expression, He added: “
from the blood of Abel unto
the blood of Zachariah....” Jesus therefore placed the murder of Abel
near the “foundation of the world.” Granted, Abel’s death occurred some
years after the Creation, but it was close enough to that event for
Jesus to state that it was associated with “the foundation of the
world.” If vast spans of time—that is, enough to accommodate
evolutionists and their sympathizers—occurred while Adam and Eve were in
the Garden of Eden, then how could the shedding of human blood be
declared by the Son of God to extend back to the “foundation of the
world”?]
Satan and his ignominious band of outlaws (“sons of the evil
one”—Matthew 13:38) have worked their ruthless quackery on mankind from
the very moment the serpent met mother Eve in the Garden of Eden. When
he and his cohorts rebelled and “kept not their proper habitation,” they
were cast from the heavenly portals to be “kept in everlasting bonds
under darkness unto the judgment of the great day” (Jude 6).
The conditions of Satan‘s surrender were harsh. Although he had been
completely vanquished, although his armies had been thoroughly routed,
and although the Victor had imposed the worst kind of permanent exile,
Satan was determined not to go gently into the night. While he
admittedly had lost the war, he nevertheless was planning future
skirmishes. Vindictive by nature (Revelation 12:12), in possession of
cunning devices (2 Corinthians 2:11), and thoroughly determined to be
“the deceiver of the world” (Revelation 12:9), he set his face against
all that is righteous and holy—and never once looked back. His anger at
having been defeated fueled his determination to strike back in revenge.
But strike back at whom? God’s power was too great, and His omnipotence
was too all-consuming (Job 42:2; 1 John 4:4). Another target was
needed; another repository of satanic revenge would have to be found.
And who better to serve as the recipient of hell’s unrighteous
indignation than mankind—the only creature in the Universe made “in the
image and likeness of God” (Genesis 1:26-27)? As the late Rex A. Turner
Sr. observed: “Satan cannot attack God directly, thus he employs various
methods to attack man, God’s master creation” (1980, p. 89). What sweet
revenge—despoiling the “apple of God’s eye” and the zenith of His
creative genius! Thus, with the creation of man, the battle was on.
Little wonder that in his first epistle the apostle Peter described
Satan as an adversary that, “as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking
whom he may devour” (5:8).
Now—knowing what the Scriptures tell us about Satan’s origin, attitude,
and mission—is it sensible to suggest that he would take his proverbial
time, and twiddle his figurative thumbs, while allowing Adam and Eve to
revel in the covenant relationship they enjoyed with their Maker
(Genesis 3:8 relates how God walked with them in the garden “in the cool
of the day”)? Would Satan simply “leave them alone for a long period of
time” so that they could conceive, give birth to, and rear children in
the luscious paradise known as the Garden of Eden? Is this how a hungry,
stalking lion would view its prey—by watching admiringly from afar,
allowing it hundreds or thousands of years of fulfilled joy, and
affording it time to conceive, give birth to, and rear a family?
Hardly—which is why Christ described Satan as a murderer “from the
beginning.” Satan was in no mood to wait. He was angry, he was bitter,
and he was filled with a thirst for revenge. What better way to slake
that thirst than introducing sin into God’s perfect world?
What may be said, then, about John Clayton’s suggestion that Adam and
Eve must have been in the garden for an extended period of time since
God said that He was going to “multiply” Eve’s pain? How could He
possibly “multiply” something she never had experienced? This quibble
can be answered quite easily. Does a person have to “experience”
something before that something can be “multiplied”? Suppose I said,
“I’m going to give you
$100.” You therefore stick out your hand
to receive the $100 bill I am holding in mine. But I immediately pull
back my hand and say, “No, I’ve changed my mind; I am going to give you
$1,000 instead!” Did you actually have to possess or “experience” the $100 before I could increase it to $1,000? Of course not.
The fact God said He was going to “multiply” Eve’s pain in childbirth
does not mean necessarily that Eve had to have experienced
some pain prior to God’s decree that she would experience
more pain.
God’s point was merely this: “Eve, you were going to experience some
pain in childbirth, but because of your sin, now you will experience
even more pain.” The fact that Eve never had experienced
any childbirth pain up to that point does not mean that she could not experience
even more pain later as a part of her penalty for having sinned against God.
Last, what about John Clayton’s idea that Adam and Eve must have been
in the Garden for an extended period of time because the text indicates
that when they left Cain and his wife “builded a city” (Genesis 4:17).
Clayton has lamented that this is “something which you
cannot do with you and your wife” (1980, 7[1]:5). Of course he would be correct—
if the city under discussion were a modern metroplex. But that is not the case here.
The Hebrew word for city is quite broad in its meaning. It may refer to
anything from a sprawling village to a mere encampment. Literally, the
term means “place of look-out, especially as it was fortified.” In
commenting on Genesis 4:17, Old Testament commentator John Willis
observed: “However, a ‘city’ is not necessarily a large, impressive
metropolis, but may be a small unimposing village of relatively few
inhabitants” (1979, p. 155). Again, apply some common sense here. What
would it be
more likely for the Bible to suggest that Cain and
his wife constructed (considering who they were and where they were
living)—a thriving, bustling, metropolis, or a Bedouin tent city? To ask
is to answer, is it not? To this very day, Bedouin tent cities are
quite commonplace in that particular area of the world. And—as everyone
will admit—two boy scouts can erect a tent, so it hardly strains
credulity to suggest that Cain and his wife would have been able to
accomplish such a task as well.
REFERENCES
Clayton, John N. (1980), “Is the Age of the Earth Related to a ‘Literal Interpretation’ of Genesis?,”
Does God Exist?, 7[1]:3-8, January.
Turner, Rex A. Sr. (1980),
Systematic Theology (Montgomery, AL: Alabama Christian School of Religion).
Willis, John T. (1979), “Genesis,”
The Living Word Commentary (Austin, TX: Sweet).
could not have been correct in their statements concerning Christ’s
life there. The publishers are so positive that Salm has effectively
proved his thesis, that the back of the book cover includes tremendously
brazen statements by those who have read the book. The cover quotes
Frank Zindler who says: “Christianity cannot survive unless this book
can be refuted,” and “By proving scientifically that Nazareth was
uninhabited at the time Jesus of Nazareth and his family were supposed
to be living there, Salm strikes the Achilles’ heel of a very popular
god.” Robert Price’s comment on the back cover states: “I am amazed by
your work and can’t wait to see the pathetic attempts to reply.”
According to his “fans,” Salm’s book must be answered in order for Christianity to remain a reasonable, historic religion.
