# The Revealed Cosmology Model **URL:** \ **Category:** Side Conversation\ **Tags:** Adam\ **Created:** [August 4, 2018, 2:00pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-revealed-cosmology-model/1726 "2018-08-04T14:00:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1

**Author:** ![anon46279830](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@anon46279830](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/anon46279830)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2018, 2:00pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-revealed-cosmology-model/1726/1 "2018-08-04T14:00:04Z")

The Christ-centered model ([the Revealed Cosmology](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06XRLDYJB?tag=swamidass-20)) which I support is laid out on the thread below, unfortunately by means of videos. Key points about the model as it applies to humanity: 1. Telescoping reading of Genesis 1 and 2 where the first account is mostly about the population outside the garden but mentions Adam and the second account zooms in on Adam’s story only referencing the population outside the garden obliquely and that after the fall. Neither is mentioned in great detail in the first account because its all of creation’s history in one chapter. This also serves to hide, for a time, the mystery of Christ in the text. Adam on earth is but a copy of the pre-incarnate Christ in high heaven. 2. Adam’s biblical role is not to be the progenitor of the human race, but a figure of Christ (Rom. 5:14). He is created to be a representative for the race as it comes time for God to progressively reveal Himself to His creation and move mankind from innocence to accountability. He was given ultimate “privilege” to give mankind the best possible chance. 3. Adam is specially created fairly recently (~ 13.4K years ago using a ‘long’ way to read the genealogies without gaps in time) though adam the race (humanity) is much older. They too are specially created in some way that animals are not, though we do not have as much detail on that. 4. Mankind was in a state of innocence, not sinless perfection, before the creation/formation of Adam. Physical death after a long and happy life was not meant to be part of a curse but more like a graduation to the Land Above. Agree with Martin Luther than not even Adam was immortal without access to the Tree of Life. 5. All of mankind’s eyes were opened that they had been sinning against God. Until that point they had been living in innocence with no “thou shalt nots” to convict them and no self-awareness to do so either. Once mankind is able to “know good and evil” for himself he discovers that he is evil! He is condemned even before the law of Moses. 6. Physical inheritance from Adam is not how Original Sin spread. Rather death spread “because all sinned” (Rom 5:12) and after they knew it there was separation from God (death). Nevertheless GA is likely true as a physical event- by now Adam is somewhere in everyone’s family true. Note: the timeline of this model permits this but the YE timeline does not once you factor in the flood reducing Adam’s line to three males much more recently. 7. The animals formed in chapter two were only a small subset of those formed in chapter one, mostly versions of animals important to a farming life-style. 8. The descendants of Adam who were meant to help reconcile the earth to God instead hasten its ruin, so the LORD determines to use the earth to ruin them. The flood was not targeted at all the animals and people in from chapter 1, but the more limited set in chapter 2. 9. Since wiping out the line of Messiah would mean that the earth would ultimately perish and go to ruin, never to be reconciled to God, this was a local flood with global consequences, and the language of God reflects that. Though I don’t see the necessity for GA to spread sin nature, the date for the flood is still sufficiently remote in this model (but not in the Ussher timeline) so that the family tree of Adam still has time to spread to every people group. 10. Early Genesis is a result of a modified version of the tablet theory, and some of the description of the flood is from the perspective of Shem, Ham, and Japheth. It is not God speaking. 11. The text indicates that other human groups did not perish in the flood. There were already other people there when some of the clans of Noah came out of the hills and “found a plain in the land of Shinar”. > [@Why the Bible Teaches a Framework for Genesis which is Consistent with GA](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/why-the-bible-teaches-a-framework-for-genesis-which-is-consistent-with-ga/179): > > Apparently I could have made things a little easier on myself if I had started here by posting the video below. It says “the Bible Does not Teach that Adam is the Sole Father of the Human Race”. It is speaking genetically, not in terms of “falleness” or a spiritual version of “dark energy” or whatever one might call the trait which Joshua means when he speaks of Adam as the “sole progenitor.” In fact, the framework laid out in the video below has been called “the heart of Genealogical Adam” (GA) by another member of this forum… I thought so as well. When I came here I thought that this material was supplying the scriptural/theological framework which could support GA. And I don’t just mean the Genealogical Adam view of Adam. The GA model requires the flood to have been one which did not wipe out all of mankind either. This is because Joshua’s work in science says that the human race was not recently bottlenecked down to a single Y-chromosome as the traditional view, or even the RT… ---

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2018, 2:21pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-revealed-cosmology-model/1726/2 "2018-08-04T14:21:10Z")

**Author:** ![anon46279830](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@anon46279830](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/anon46279830)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2018, 2:26pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-revealed-cosmology-model/1726/3 "2018-08-04T14:26:21Z")

That’s less objectionable to me than putting my actual name on it. Functionally, it is Christ-centered though. ---

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2018, 2:52pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-revealed-cosmology-model/1726/4 "2018-08-04T14:52:40Z")

> [@Story Three: Recent Sole-Genealogical Progenitor Adam](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/story-three-recent-sole-genealogical-progenitor-adam/986/4): > > That’s less objectionable to me than putting my actual name on it. Functionally, it is Christ-centered though. However, it is not **THE** (as in only or first) Christ-centered model. Please change the OP. You can say things like, > the @anon46279830 model I’m putting forward is Christ-centered, by which I mean… ---

**Author:** ![anon46279830](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@anon46279830](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/anon46279830)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2018, 3:23pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-revealed-cosmology-model/1726/5 "2018-08-04T15:23:36Z")

> [@Story Three: Recent Sole-Genealogical Progenitor Adam](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/story-three-recent-sole-genealogical-progenitor-adam/986/5): > > However, it is not **THE** (as in only or first) Christ-centered model. I am honestly not aware of any other model that starts with the assumption that you have to look at the material through the lens of Christ, as if its all pointing to Christ, to make sense of early Genesis. **Nevertheless I believe you are sincerely trying to help me when I suggest that I rename my model.** In the same way, I am sincerely trying to help you when I suggest, regarding “Genealogical Adam”, that you quit using the phrase “sole ancestor” or “sole genealogical ancestor or progenitor” of humanity to describe Adam when what you are really describing is a situation in which he is A _universal_ ancestor or progenitor. How about we let each of us help the other, and we each try doing what the other suggests? I will start labeling my model as you suggest and you start labeling Adam’s ancestry as I suggest? Deal? ---

**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/peacefulscience/original/2X/6/6b7bf72453a5c60b0919b6b89a27dc18bc52382c.png) [@system](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2019, 5:17am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-revealed-cosmology-model/1726/6 "2019-03-23T05:17:58Z")

Automatically bumped on March 23, 2019, 5:17am UTC