After their rebellious sinful act Adam and Eve apparently went out to the east of the garden of Eden. It was here that, not only Cain and Abel were born, but the Bible also later mentions by name a third son, Seth. However, notice that Adam and Eve had other children as well. For Genesis 5:4 says:"And the days of Adam after his fathering Seth came to be eight hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters". This meant that Cain and Abel had sisters, and possibly other brothers not listed by name. These grew up together as earth's original family. The Bible record shows us that people then had much longer life spans then, and they had bigger families.

People didn't come from Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve are mythical people written during a time of great ignorance and a lack of peer reviewed study. Humans, as well as all biological life on this planet, came from a common ancestor; DNA. DNA came from RNA, and RNA came from lifeless elements such as Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogenn a process called "abiogineses" (Which roughly means life from lifelessness). From that seed, the biological tree has branched out tall and wide. We humans currently occupy one of the end branches.

they have another son named seth, and as far as i know incest is not yet acknowledge as sin, since this is the only way people can multiply and as the world has enough people. the rule for incest got in the "book"..

Adam and Eve had a lot more children (sons and daughters) that are not mentioned by name. (see Genesis 5:4) Through them we have descended. We all descended from two common ancestors, Adam the first man, and Eve the first woman. I hope that this is helpful. -In the Master's service. Thank you and God bless you!

It must have been by incest. Either the siblings mated with each other or they mated with their parents. Yuck! While we're at it, were Adam and Eve actually married? I don't think it is mentioned in the Genesis story. Maybe all their children were actually bastards?

Strange - out of the seemingly thousands of Bible-preoccupied folks on AB, only one answered this question?! This is another case-in-point that, if you read the Bible, best not take it literally! ;-)

Adam and Eve had more children besides Cain &Abel they had sons and daughters Genesis 3:20 After this Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she had to become the mother of everyone living. Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived on for a hundred and thirty years. Then he became father to a son in his likeness, in his image, and called his name Seth. 4 And the days of Adam after his fathering Seth came to be eight hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters. 5 So all the days of Adam that he lived amounted to nine hundred and thirty years and he died.

FROM ALL THEIR OTHER (STATED) SONS AND DAUGHTERS! HERE ... ENJOY THE FOLLOWING: PROFESSORS: GIG’S & GENG’S WISDOM TIME AGAIN: EVOLUTION: Monkey-Ape Time Mrs Iva Tail To Tell (Dean of Makittup University) declared, "Our direct forefathers were gorillas. We straightened our backs and shortened our arms. The latter [or is that ladder?] meant we couldn't have such high shelves of course. But you can't have everything. Yes, we must have come from gorillas because they look more like us on the outside than anything else. That's obvious proof". "Yes", said Prof Gig (Professor in nuts bolts and screws of all kinds), "many years ago they used to talk about how intelligent dogs were, but now we say how intelligent gorillas are. Soon we will have research to prove that they are more intelligent than all other animals; if we can get someone to fund it". Mrs Soarit of Perth WA says, "I watched it on TV, how they put a monkey in a room with a box and put a banana on a string that he couldn't reach. The monkey worked out to move the box over and get onto it to get the banana. The only thing is I've seen a dog do the same thing years before". Dr Ivanew Mith (Vetinary Surgeon of Wefixit Clinic) said, "a gorillas stomach is very different from ours and many other parts. If we ate what a gorilla eats in a day (bamboo shoots) we would be dead. We are more like a horse in eating habits and can eat most things they do. Also we can eat most things birds eat. So horses or birds must be our closest relatives". Dr R E Movitt (Brain Surgeon of Qurem Hospital) said, "Talk is made of people having a so called "human" extra piece on our brains, that apes don't have, that makes us more intelligent. But there are many people who are born without this section as a deformity but it creates no thinking or action disability: The person is completely normal". Prof Gig stated in regard these things; "there are always facts we need to ignore in the pursuit of theoretical science and funding. In this case quite a lot of facts. But then we also get a lot of funding here, as it's a popular theory". Miss Itneedsta Makesens commented, "even if we found a group of monkeys that once wrote their history it still wouldn't prove that apes changed into man. All it would prove is that we found an intelligent group of apes. And anyone with any imagination could come up with another theory of our existence that would sound far more realistic than apes changing into people _ or at least equally as irrational". Why didn't I evolve into a human so that nothing would step on me? Evolution Dr F Roard (Phd., DOB, FBI, KGB, MIA, POT) said, "things all changed by deformities that survived and got passed on. So we believe that something as complex as an eye just happened by chance. Over MILLIONS of years, of course. It makes it sound more believable when we say that because no one can conceive millions of years. So each deformity that went into making an eye was passed on to the next generation. Now I know what you are thinking. You are wondering why we can't seem to find loads of animals, insects or people existing today with only partly formed eyes. Yes, it is true that there would need to be countless masses of them, for the working eye to exist on such a large scale. Particularly considering the seemingly endless intermediate steps and those who would have therefore failed to evolve the rest of the eye correctly by chance. We try to ignore these facts in the interest of 'truth'. And the theory is popular." Professor Messa of the Institute for Lost Scientists said, "We believe the other theory where evolution happened because things decided that they needed to change for their environment. Animals also did this. A lizard decided that it wasn't safe or getting enough food on the ground so it thought about the problem and decided that wings were the best solution to the problem and so he'd become a bird. It realised that this would take MILLIONS of years, of course. So as each of its children were born the lizard passed on his plan so that the children would carry on that approach to the problem. They, in turn, had to pass on this approach to their children to resolve the problem also. He had to make sure that they kept on with that plan or they would die out from the problem that they needed to change for. Fortunately he could foresee this problem becoming bad enough to need to make this change MILLIONS of YEARS before they actually would die out. Strangely enough lizards didn't die out anyway. So it was all in vain. But birds are glad that lizards did so; and now some birds feed on lizards, making it all the better that lizards didn't die out, but leaving lizards wondering about the wisdom of it." Miss White of Brisbane asked, "If we are evolving does that mean we may end up being little green men and going to other planets"? Professor I Dunno of the Institute for Unemployed Scientists said, "one day life just suddenly sprang up and there was an incredibly complex living cell". I asked how this could happen. He explained that it was sort of statistical/magical luck. "Then the cell got lonely and decided it wanted another one; so it worked out how to evolve so it would be capable of splitting (highly intelligent these cells); and did so. And then there were 2 of them", he said. "And before you know it they were just splitting everywhere and we had piles and piles of them: All over the place". I asked him how no life had ever existed throughout all eternity before that time? "Well this has probably happened elsewhere, I'd suppose", he said. "So this amazing magic of an appearing complex living cell just popping up from nowhere has happened other times you feel professor", I asked? "Well, over many MILLIONS of years, you see", he replied. Mr/Ms Los Tie-Dentitti says, "women have evolved into men's bodies". Mr I. L. Watchit asks, "I saw a documentary on TV about moths in a place in England. They explained how there used to be more light moths and few dark ones because the dark ones were seen on the light trees and eaten by birds. But now with so much smog the trees are dark and there are more dark moths, as the birds eat the light ones. But this only proves survival of the fittest. This doesn't prove the evolutionary theory because it was already known when the theory was invented. To prove the theory evidence would have to come forth to prove the theory itself, not the known facts it was based on."? Mr B Acake of Sydney asks, "as I have rheumatism in my back wouldn't it have been better to have stayed without one"? Of evolution Dr Pluggitt of Drippie University states, "yes, we now know that bugs turned into people". When I asked him how this could possibly be, he explained, "yes, well, it all happens over MILLIONS of years, you see. Anything can be believed if you talk about MILLIONS of years". PROFESSORS GENG AND GIG – AT IT AGAIN!! QUESTION: If we were to search for the Dead Center of EVOLUTION, would we find it at Darwin Cemetery, in Fred Flintstone’s Dinosaur Zoo or at a Barney’s Rubble’s Skeleton Bank??!! Ezekiel, Skeleton Bank Teller: ‘Dem bones … dem bones … dem dry bones…’ ‘Dem bones … dem bones … dem dry bones’ ‘Dem bones … dem bones … dem dry bones’ ‘Oh hear the word of the Lord.’ Dating Methods Professor Lessor of Fundus Institute commented, "we use the finest dating methods. And we know that we are right that these bones are MILLIONS of years old. Carbon dating has been shown to be correct sometimes, to some degree, over periods of hundreds of years _ usually only being hundreds of years out. And we have other dating methods now that are almost as accurate; particularly when we recalibrate our machines when we know what date is required". Mr Form at Hard Drive said, "I was watching a program on TV the other day that carbon dated a skull found in Australia to be 2,500 years old. But the scientists didn't like that date so they went around trying all these other dating methods and finally found one that said it was about 60,000 to 70,000 years old and so they took those dates. When asked why they didn't use the carbon dating method that is so 'accurate' they said it was because the lime in the soil must have confused it". Dr G Etpade of Theoretic Institute stated, "we are at a new age now where we no longer have the problems of science in the past that almost always had theories that have been proven wrong in spite of them proving them right at the time. All our theories are correct because we have proven them right on TV. We also have a new advantage to use to convince people we're right called 'dating methods'. This is a cleaver idea where you use some instrument to obtain the date you want. We decide it's MILLIONS of years old then it becomes MILLIONS of years old". Elder Harris (The Church of Jesus Christ LDS missionary) questions, "I have heard that a rock formed by a volcano only a short time before was carbon dated to be MILLIONS of years old. Also that a rock only a few years old, brought back from the moon, was similarly dated. On both occasions the truth had been kept from those doing the dating. Why should anyone believe all this, unproven, MILLIONS of years stuff"? Dr Thinkitt of the Local Logicians Club said, "All accepted fact must be based on proven facts (premises). Therefore talk of MILLIONS of years is illogical as no one can PROVE what happened in a time of which we have no way to prove it absolutely correct. If someone makes a claim about ancient Egypt from known facts about Egypt it could be logical. But we have no written record of MILLIONS of years ago and we can't go back to prove or disprove the claim or the premises upon which it is based: Regardless of what instruments are used. No logician could accept someone saying they KNOW about MILLIONS of years ago as anything but the ravings of a fool". Miss Daytmee of Hobart says, "yes, well, my dating method is to play hard to get".

In Genesis ch.1 verse 27, "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." This statement tells me that God created more men and women than just Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were just the first two people that God created.

well adam slept with abel while eve was getting some off cain then after months of swinging they each had twins and moved to central america and settled there happily ever after.

They were Adam and Eve's kids. You didn't have to worry about inbreeding in those days because the DNA was nearly perfect. Not like it is now after thousands of years of breaking down and degenerating.

The Adam and Eve story was plagiarized from older Sumerian myths of the Anannaki. They were in that region mining gold, enslaving the natives. In the original version, "Eve" was male and the "snake" an Anannki helping the humans escape slavery. There were plenty of other people around at the time. These slave drivers didn't like the natives having sex when they wanted them working, thus the shame of sex in the Abrahamic religions.

After reading every other answer; it shows me that everyone has their own opinion about this ... I've often wondered about the other people also ... LIKE: If in the beginning there was Adam and Eve ... they had Two Sons, Cain and Abel .. Cain KILLED Abel. Cain was banished to this "Land of Nod" ? Then; Cain took a WIFE ? WHERE did the wife come from ? Was his Sister alo in "Nod " ? What more do we know about "Nod and the people there ? I've ask this on a radio program years ago and was told I was being blastaphomous (sp) ... BUT; still no one has EVER answered this to MY satisfaction ...

after that part of the bible was taken out that explained all this after cain and able they had more children cain took a sister and left Eden and populated the earth they took that part out because incest is a sin

I think it's interesting how similar the story is to the scientific view of the origin of life. First the perfect environment for life to begin (primordial soup-Eden) The first life being both male and female until separated (a single cell until the division of the sexes - Adam, Eve) And then "knowledge" self-awareness, leading to selfishness (original sin?) Once self becomes important, the environment is no longer perfect. Life begins a struggle with it's counterparts; the other life that was generated in that same perfect environment (the casting out, or the loss of perfection) Had I wanted to relate the origin of life to a primitive people, I might tell it in terms they would understand, or impress the general wordless knowledge upon them, leaving them to their own best methods of understanding. Pure intuition, on our part, could also have been the author. I'm not saying that this is how it happened, but when viewed from this perspective, both views are surprisingly similar. It's just the way these views are literally communicated that differs. At any rate, it is a curious correlation and worth consideration. Are scientific theories and belief system theologies, the telling of the same tale in different languages, or could even one have borrowed from the other with out realizing? We may find with the passing of time, that both communities, speak truths in their differing languages.

Adam and Eve are the ancestors of us all according to my understanding of the Bible.

Some radical priest actually think its fiction, but seem fine with genesis. I didn't say I did.

easy answer Gen 1:27

Gen 1:27 tells you that there were other people on the planet beffore Adam and Eve and the Bible tells us that Adam only had one sone at the time he was about 130 years old so that would mean that before that he had no childeren and that he lived to be 930. Yes they did have childeren affter Seth but when Adam was 130 years old to date he only had one child and Cain and Abel were not it I have a book coming out on the Bible in 2009 sometime and if you would like to see the information that UI have pulled from the Bible please email me @ pharoah_prince_islam_x@yahoo.com and no I am not what a person would consider a Muslim so please don't let my name fool you