As we see from Creation - the Gap & Deep, the time had come for human beings to be established in
our present world. Most of us know who Adam was. Was he really the first man? Was he the only one
formed at this time? How exactly did the rest of the human beings fit into our ancient earth?
And Adam gave names to every animal, and to the birds of the heaven, and to every beast of the
open field. But for Adam, no partner was found like himself. - Genizah Manuscripts Gen. 2:20
The above is a pseudo-biblical account of creation, at
the time the first man – Adam – was given the task of
naming each animal. As we notice, he does not only
give names to the animals, he gives names to groups
known as the birds of the heaven and the beast of the
open field. Now, wait a minute: who were they? Just
who were the birds and beasts if they weren’t animals?
And, if they were only animals, then why notate the two
as separate groups? This happens quite often in ancient
texts, including the Bible. Why?
As we also notice, in the above text, Adam was also look-
ing for a partner - a helpmate (or wife) - at the same time.
Now, why would Adam look for a wife among lowly animals,
if that’s indeed what they all were? Was Adam really alone
at this early time? Could there have been more to the whole Garden of Eden story than most of us
have assumed? In this section, we’ll see ancient scriptural evidence that could point towards other
groups of people on the earth around the time of Adam, known as pre-Adamites. In another example:
13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and
Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three
wives of his sons with them, into the ark;
14 They, and every Beast of the Field after his kind, and all
the cattle after their kind, and every Creeping Thing that
Creepeth on the earth after his kind, and every Fowl of the
Air after his kind, every bird of every sort.
15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark... wherein is the
breath of life.
Traditionally, many people think this referred to Noah, his family and the animals aboard the ark. As
we further look into how the Bible lists certain groups, however, we begin notice how, again, the
above verses mention the Beasts of the Field. Who were they? What about the Fowl of the Air? We
also notice the Fowl of the Air and the birds were listed separately. Why? Again, if these both stood
for birds then why separate the two, unless the Fowl of the Air was the name of a specific group of
individuals – a specific group who, obviously, were not birds?
Adam & the pre-Adamites
Copyright 2010, Brett T., All Rights Reserved.
No content of this article or of mysterybabylon.com may be reproduced, duplicated, given away,
transmitted or resold in any form without prior written permission from the author.
 Genizah Manuscripts of Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch Volume One, Genesis 2:20, trans. Michael L. Klein (Cincinnati:
Hebrew Union College Press, 1986), 2.
 The Babylonian Talmud, Jews’ College / Soncino English Translation, Yebamoth 98a, http://www.halakhah.
com/yebamoth/yebamoth_98.html (accessed Dec. 28, 2010).
 The Zohar, Volume 1, Beresheet A, Section 29. Evil admixtures, 291, www2.kabbalah.com/k/index.
php/p=zohar/zohar&vol=2&sec=50 (accessed Feb. 24, 2010).
 Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Polygenism, 1, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygenism (accessed Nov. 21, 2006 187).
 Targum Pseudo-Jonathan (Targum of Palestine / Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel), On the Book of Genesis, Section 3,
Berashith, http://targum.info/pj/pjgen1-6.htm (accessed Oct. 2, 2009).
 Saltair na Rann, 1789-96, trans. David Greene.
 Star Wars, Lesson Seven – The Serpent, 1, http://usa-the-republic.com/religion/star%20wars/Star%20Wars%20-%20Lesson%
20Seven.htm (accessed April 23, 2005 88).
 The Chronicles of Jerahmeel (The Hebrew Bible Historiale), 6:14, trans. M. Gaster, Ph. D. (London: The Royal Asiatic
 The Book of the Generations of Adam, 1:3, 3:1, http://www.earth-history.com/Pseudepigrapha/generations-adam.htm
(accessed May 5, 2007).
In the Garden of Eden, there was, in actuality, work to be done: people had to work and sweat (at least
somewhat) for their food. Although things were very good at the time, the Garden of Eden wasn’t
perfect. Some human effort was needed to ensure survival of the plants (even though it wasn’t too
hard). Assuming there were other Adamites and pre-Adamites on the earth at the same time, Adam
was given the authority to manage a number of those around him. All of them worked together, as a
small community. He did his job well, at least for the time being. Looking at the world, now, we know
this ancient, organized situation didn’t last. The question that would naturally arise: if our world was
fashioned very “good” (as in Genesis 1:31), then how could anything go wrong? What could have
happened to disrupt this authority of Adam? What brought the ancient world in the direction it is in;
as we see now? As we’ll see, there were certain individuals, all the way back in the beginning of the
“Six-Day Creation,” who resisted Adam’s position of authority. They wanted him to falter, somehow, in
some way. Adam’s control of the garden would indeed be temporary. The dominion of Adam and his
companion group the Adamites would diminish, rather quickly. The era of this cosmos as being “very
good” was going to end. Rebellious Angels and Serpents will tell us more.
If we assumed that God created Adam at this late hour, one might ask: what would be so special about
this particular human being, why created him separately?
And the LORD God said the angels who ministered before Him, Behold, Adam is sole on the earth,
as I am sole in the heavens above. - Targum Pseudo-Jonathan III
When God gave a pure inspiration to your (Adam’s) body on the earth, you were separated from every
strong creature the day your soul was formed. When you were brightly created in the likeness of
God’s shape, when every dear creature was told that it should come to do you reverence.
- Saltair na Rann 1789-96
Adam was formed in a different way, at a different time; and, for a different reason. This man was to be
the leader of a Garden, as well as other people around him.
8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there
he put the man whom he had formed.
15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of
Eden to dress it and to keep it.
Contrary to what many might assume, God did not appoint Adam to sit on a throne; He did not appoint
him to be in a wonderful position of authority; He apportioned Adam to till the ground - to be the head
farmer. Not a big deal. As well, if God created angels before human beings; if He next created the
rest of the human beings before Adam, then why would he create this “special” man last? Wouldn’t God
create angels first; then create Adam; down to the rest of the human race? The answer is, of course,
that God created Adam to be humble. Although Adam was created last (but not least) in the order of
creation, he had another anomaly to him: he was created out of lowly dust – humble ingredients.
Obviously, God wanted Adam to be a humbled leader (which he was)!
But, someone had to be the manager of the Garden. We’ve even been taught there is a hierarchy of angels
in the heavenly realm. There has to be organization in every cosmos, every country; and, as we see, in
We see that God called their name Adam. If there
was only one man named Adam formed at this part
of Genesis, then why call their name Adam? Maybe
this was the time God formed the group Adam be-
longed to – the Adamites. The famous Garden of
Eden was also established around this time. There
seemed to be a need for a special person – named
Adam - to manage this Garden.
5 …and there was not a man to till the ground.
7 And the LORD God formed man (Adam) of the
dust of the ground…
With that said and done, we already understand how a number of people in nations of old considered
individuals, or entire members of other nations, as “beneath” them. This labeling is still done today,
only in diluted form: men sometimes brag about being a "dog;" a woman may refer to a cheating man
as a "beast," etc. Not to single out anybody in particular, but a number of ancient Israelites (who
scribed the words of the Bible) could have thought in much of this same way. Because of this, those
who translated the Bible into other languages, over the years, could have either made mistakes, or - for
whatever “politically correct” reason - mistranslated some Bible words; to make it fit with what they
wanted the words to say! If the above groups could indeed represent groups of people, then the
Garden of Eden, and the entire world of old, could take on a whole new meaning.
As already stated, in the Biblical era, this type of labeling wasn’t necessarily meant to be offensive. In
Revelation, for example, the word "beast" was used to describe good, angelic beings of God (Rev.
4:6-8)! We also see more examples of this:
For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected
the same in hope… - Rom. 8:20 (KJV)
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things
are become new. - II Cor. 5:17 (KJV)
These weren’t necessarily meant to be derogatory! Not knowing, or not wanting to know, these above
groups could actually be human beings, translators of the Bible may have done what they could to
keep these verses as sounding these groups were members of the animal kingdom. Note the follow-
ing ancient Jewish source:
There are many kinds among Israel that are called cattle and beasts. One is from the side of the
serpent and another from the side of idolatrous nations, who are like animals and wild beasts.
- Zohar Beresheet A29
This says a lot. We will see how (in Fornication – Eve and the Serpent) some people were thought to
have originated from the Serpent (in the Garden of Eden)! As we’ll also see, it’s not really where a
person originated from, because we see (in the above) that those who were involved in practices such
as idolatry were also considered animals. They were looked down upon because of their practices, and
ways of life (i.e. child sacrifice, immoral activities, illicit sex, etc.).
Interestingly, dictionaries such as Merriam-Webster (m-w.com) also seem to confirm that certain ref-
erences to “animals” could actually refer to human beings. One archaic definition of cattle is, "human
beings especially en masse (i.e. a single body)." A beast, according to the above dictionary, can mean,
"an animal under human control,” or “a contemptible person." As we also can conclude, for the most
part, it’s not the genetics of an individual that could set their designation as a beast, but their negative
practices. Often, the ancients who were considered "wild" or “idolatrous” were looked upon in these
ways because they acted as uncivilized as wild beasts of the animal kingdom. We also have a
number of Biblical references which, interestingly enough, seem to refer to these groups as people:
For before those days there was no hire for man, nor hire for beast (bahemah)...
- Zech. 8:10 (KJV)
- what kind of animal gets hired, or paid?
But let man and beast (bahemah) be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: let them turn
every one from his evil way. - Jonah 3:8 (KJV)
- what animal knows he's evil, and cries out to God?
There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast
(bahemah) or man... - Ex. 19:13 (KJV)
- what kind of animal has hands, except a human?
...Let neither man nor beast (bahemah), herd nor flock, taste any thing...
- Jonah 3:7 (KJV)
- if you notice, humans (man and bahemah) and animals (herd and flock) seemed to be grouped to-
gether; yet, separated from each other.
There are ways we could go with this information which might be considered a transformation into the
unsavory. The information in this website, however, will not attempt to veer off into the production of
any sort of bias or prejudice. It is the corruption of socio–cultural elements of our society which we will
concentrate on. We will see examples of some people who acted magnificently, even though they were
not of the seed of Adam. On top of this, we’ll now begin to see a major reason why there was a
separation of people in the Bible: there would be a very important Prophecy (in Genesis 3:15) that
needed to be fulfilled (see Fornication - Eve & the Serpent)! Because of this prophecy, there would
need to be a separation of certain groups of individuals. After the time of Christ, however, this was not
as big of an issue as before. What is important to know, however, is that there could have been other
groups of people who existed, besides Adam, all the way back to the beginning.
Why would some people, today, be so animate about covering up different possibilities such as this?
In the last hundred years or so, we, as a human race, have faced another serious angle to deal with in
our society: we’ve had another injunction on individual thought and freedoms, as far as reinterpreting
ancient texts such as the Bible: “political correctness!” Especially today, modern translators may feel
the need to translate the Bible, and other ancient works, a certain way: a way that might not sound
offensive to the majority of readers. This, of course, might sound good on the surface, but changes
such as these can actually destroy the intended context and meaning of the texts, themselves!
Translators may also feel the need to rectify these ancient documents in to fit the current, established
views of science, as well as other secular or humanistic thought. Yet, for those who also want to
“absorb” the Bible into modern-day science, the concept of pre-Adamites clearly does not set well.
Evolutionists work hard to push a belief in Monogenism: that we all come from a common origin.
According to this thought, our human race did originate from two ancestors, but they were actually
“ape-like” (an evolutionary “Adam” and “Eve”). This was a couple of million years ago; not thousand.
This thought is essential for evolutionary mutation or survival adaptation to take place. The pre-Adamite
theory hurts those trying to convert us to these thoughts because a belief in pre-Adamites says
practically the opposite. Monogenism states we evolved from lower, “ape-like” beings. With the pre-
Adamite theory, we understand that God created different groups of people, who all started out in a
world that was very good; and everyone and everything bred after its own kind. They did not evolve;
they did not advance through some genetic mutation or environmental adaptation.
Whatever way is the truth, at least, we seem to have a case for the pre-Adamite theory being support-
ed by the Bible. Notice how the verses, below, seem to refer to “animals” as people:
22 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and all my judgments, and do
them: that the land, whither I bring you to dwell therein, spue you
23 And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast
24 But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will
give it unto you to possess it... I am the LORD your God, which
separated from other people.
25 Ye shall therefore put difference between clean beasts (Bahemah)
and unclean, between unclean fowls (Owph) and clean: and ye
shall not make your souls abominable by beast (Bahemah), or by
fowl (Owph), or by any manner of thing that creepeth on the
ground (earth), which I have separated from you as unclean.
26 And ye shall be holy unto me: for I the LORD am holy, and
have severed you from other people...
Why should the ancient Israelites feel the need to separate themselves from animals, anyhow? How
can only being near an animal make one's soul abominable? Only people can do that!
The beasts (Chay) of the field shall honor me...
- Isa. 43:20 (KJV)
- what kind of animal has the ability to even comprehend what honor is?
Something truly different is going on here. These same above groups, along with being around during
Adam’s day, would be notated as going aboard and coming off of Noah’s Ark (Gen. 7:8-9, 7:13-15,
8:17-19)! On top of this, these same groups are mentioned some 1500 years later (in Ho. 2:18 and
Ezek. 38:20)! Could there have been many more people around in Adam’s time, in the times of Noah,
and after the flood? What contributions could these people have made to their world, as well? It’s
crucial we look at this possibility. It’s also important not to maintain a blind eye to what these ancient
texts might actually be saying - for the sake of science, “political correctness,” or any other reason.
As we go further into our examination of Genesis, let’s discuss the creation of a group known as
Adamites. One member of this group would become the main focus of the early chapters of Genesis,
as well as ancient history. The most prestigious man of his time was, yes, Adam.
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness… male and female created he them
(a.k.a. the Adamites?). - Gen. 1:26-7 (KJV)
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam (a.k.a. the
Adamites?), in the day when they were created. - Gen. 5:2 (KJV)
When one sees references to "birds" and "beasts,"
today, one may be able to assume the obvious: it is
insensitive and wrong to refer to someone as an
animal. Some authors of ancient texts could have
referred to people they didn't like as "animals;" but,
at other times, these terms weren’t necessarily
meant in a derogatory way. Regardless of the sting
that could occur from name-calling such as this, the
interpretation of these references as actual people
may have gotten lost in the process; but it really
could have a relevance to our reinterpretation of
these early stories of Genesis. We also must consider:
just because something might sound insensitive doesn’t
mean it is, or that the content wouldn’t have some sort
of relevancy. It also doesn’t mean this information
warrants any containment or deletion.
We know there were references to groups such as the beasts of the field and fowl of the air around the
time of Adam. There were also references to these same groups, and a few others, around the time of
Noah. The same were even represented 1500 years beyond the flood! The proper Hebrew words,
translated into English as beasts and fowl, are Chay and Owph, respectively. One meaning of Chay,
in fact, is "a community" - a "community" of what? Based on these ancient works, there could have
been four or five different “groups” of people on earth, beginning with the time of Adam. These are,
often, mentioned in the Bible, and these other works. Let’s look at them (in their original Hebrew names):
THE FOWL OF THE AIR
(a.k.a. the Owph of the Air)
THE BEAST OF THE FIELD and/or CATTLE
(a.k.a. the Chay of the Field and/or Bahemah of the Field)
THE CREEPING THING THAT CREEPETH
(a.k.a. the Remes that Creepeth)
(a.k.a. the Adam)
These same names seem to appear, again and again, throughout the Bible, along with other sources.
As we’ve seen with Creation - the Gap & Deep, we know that translators of the Bible's original Hebrew
and Greek probably did so with the best of intentions and preconceived notions. Could there have
been more people than Adam at this time, unapparent to these translators; and what could this mean
to Mystery Babylon? Could a number of these ancient references to “animals” actually stand for
human beings? Could they have been named as such for derogatory reasons; or was this just ancient
“common-talk?” The answer is: these references could go either way.