by keetypie1 on December 4th, 2006

Question

Help answer this question below.

If adam and eve were the first humans and they gave birth to two boys, who did they have sex with to create the next generation? are we all the final product of the original incest according to the bible?

Like
Report

Share:: Facebook; Twitter; Other

Answers. 94 helpful answers below.

by seahorse on February 11th, 2009
What Is the Bible’s View?
Where Did Cain Get His Wife?
“I HAVE been in the army nearly eight years and have asked many chaplains that question. None could answer it!” So explained a young Danish man to a visiting minister of Jehovah’s witnesses.
Why is this such a difficult question for many persons, including even clergymen?
To understand why, consider the way in which this question is often asked: ‘The Bible says that Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel. Cain killed his brother and went to another land where he took himself a wife and raised a family. If Adam and Eve were the only humans created by God, where did Cain get his wife?’
In framing the question in this way, it is evident that questioners think that Adam and Eve must not have originally been the only humans. So, they reason, Cain evidently obtained his wife from other peoples living on earth. However, this view is not in harmony with the Bible, which says: “Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she had to become the mother of everyone living.”—Gen. 3:20.
Many others, however, do not believe the Bible account of creation to be historical. Such worldly critics may, therefore, dismiss the question regarding where Cain got his wife as unworthy of consideration. They do not believe that Adam and Eve or their son Cain ever really existed.
Well, then, is the question regarding Cain and his wife a legitimate one? Do we have sound reason for believing that he and his parents really existed, and that the entire human family actually sprang from one common source, Adam and Eve?
Yes, this Bible view is in keeping with the evidence. Modern-day scientists have, in fact, indicated this. For example, in the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s Third Statement on Race, twenty-two experts say: “Mankind is one . . . all men belong to the same species, Homo sapiens. . . . all men are probably derived from the same common stock.”
Also, Professor Ruth Benedict and Dr. Gene Weltfish observe in the publication The Races of Mankind: “The Bible story of Adam and Eve, father and mother of the whole human race, told centuries ago the same truth that science has shown today: that all the peoples of the earth are a single family and have a common origin.”
Well, then, since this is the case, Where did Cain get his wife? Is there a logical Bible answer?
Yes, there is. It is pointed to in the very instructions given to Adam and Eve shortly after their creation, namely: “Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it.”—Gen. 1:28.
Obedience to this command would require that Adam and Eve have children. Then these children, in turn, would marry and bear children. This process of reproduction by succeeding generations would need to continue in order to fill the earth in harmony with God’s purpose.
However, before Eve was pregnant with her first child Cain, both Adam and his wife sinned by disobeying God and were driven outside the garden of Eden. (Gen. 3:1-19) Where would Adam and Eve now live? The Bible tells us: “With that Jehovah God put [Adam] out of the garden of Eden to cultivate the ground from which he had been taken. And so he drove the man out and posted at the east of the garden of Eden the cherubs and the flaming blade of a sword that was turning itself continually to guard the way to the tree of life.”—Gen. 3:23, 24.
From this it can be seen that Adam 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.
Time passed. Finally, following the offering of sacrifices to God by two of the sons, Cain became jealous of Abel because God showed favor toward Abel and his sacrifice, but not toward Cain and his sacrifice. Cain allowed hatred to develop toward Abel and he murdered him.—Gen. 4:1-8; 1 John 3:10-12.
For this wicked deed God sentenced Cain to banishment, away from the rest of his relatives. The Bible says: “Cain went away from the face of Jehovah and took up residence in the land of Fugitiveness [called “the land of Nod” in some Bible translations] to the east of Eden.”—Gen. 4:9-16.
However, notice here that the Bible does not say that Cain found his wife in the land of Fugitiveness. It simply says: “Afterward Cain had intercourse with his wife and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch.”—Gen. 4:17.
Where, then, did Cain get his wife? It was obviously from among his own family. His wife was one of his fleshly sisters, a daughter of Adam and Eve. Cain was likely married at the time he killed Abel, or shortly thereafter took one of his sisters as a wife. They then traveled together to the land of Fugitiveness, where they took up residence and started their own family.
“But such a union is incest!” some may object. This objection reflects knowledge of the risk to children when brothers and sisters marry in our day. These are frequently born with some physical deformity or mental incapacity. Thus most lands today have laws forbidding marriage between close fleshly relatives.
It must be remembered, however, that circumstances were different in earlier times. Adam and Eve were created perfect, and the instruction for them ‘to multiply and fill the earth’ would necessarily require that their offspring marry one another and reproduce. (Gen. 1:28) But as perfect humans, their children would have been perfect as were their parents.
Even though Adam and Eve sinned and became imperfect, Cain and his brothers and sisters were still so near to physical perfection that the children they produced did not suffer the same adverse effects as do children born of such unions today. Even some 2,000 years afterward, God’s faithful servant Abraham married his half-sister Sarah, and God did not disapprove. (Gen. 20:12) It was yet another 450 years or so before God saw fit to provide his nation of Israel a body of laws that forbade incest on penalty of death. (Lev. 18:8-17) By that time imperfection had apparently developed to such an extent that no longer was it safe for close relatives to marry.
So, really, the question of where Cain got his wife is not a difficult one. The answer is provided right within the Bible, and it becomes obvious when the Bible account is read carefully.
Comments
- Good answer and I must admit the first long answer I have read from start to finish. I find that the font on the site added to the fact that some do not use paragraph breaks I find reading long answers daunting.
  
  It's odd how something like incest was acceptable then but nowadays people frown on it, I know what it says in the bible but I am talking about with that knowledge how people react. Interesting.
  
  Report
  
  by Anonymous on February 12th, 2009
- Thanks...A few comments have said I post too long comments so will try to do less , it's a bi difficult sometimes as there is a lot of information that can be presented.
  
  Report
  
  by seahorse on February 12th, 2009
- Excellent answer! Thanks! And there's nothing wrong with a long complex answer if the explanation requires one.
  
  Report
  
  by HungryGuy on February 13th, 2009
- Thanks HungryGuy,nice for you to say so .
  
  Report
  
  by seahorse on February 13th, 2009
- Yes linnett ,there are some things that in todays world seems hard to understand , but I guess we must realise that it was all to do with the promised seed which took priority .
  
  Report
  
  by seahorse on February 17th, 2009
- That is the problem with most chrisians,they cannot defend Genesis,and answer where cains wife was from.1Cor.15:45,says as it is written,"The first man Adam was made a living soul;the last Adam was made a quicening spirit.God didn't make a whole race of people.Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve,because she is the mother of all living.All people other than Adam are descendants of Eve.Genesis 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle,and fowl of the air and to every beast of the field;but Adam there was not found an help meet for him.One race of women Eve.So you see there wasn't any other women on the earth,just Eve,whom God made from Adams rib.Genesis 5:4 says Adam was 800 yrs old,so they would have had alot of kids.So in 1Cor.God made one race,so cains wife had to come from Eve.
  
  Report
  
  by Jesus is God on April 28th, 2009
- So the short answer is that Adam and Eve had many more children than just Cain and Abel as stated in the Bible? And all those children (including Cain and Abel) mated with each other--brothers and sisters--to propagate the human race?
  
  Report
  
  by HungryGuy on April 29th, 2009
- Yes that's it the Bible says Eve became the mother of everyone living ,, simple : “Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she had to become the mother of everyone living.”—Gen. 3:20.
  
  Report
  
  by seahorse on April 29th, 2009
- I have a different view. I am of the opinion that Adam and Eve were not the first people on earth, but rather the first people to receive the Spirit of YHWH. Yashua Messiach (Jesus) often spoke to the disciples saying that they cannot understand the spiritual, and thats why he speaks in parables. Look at the creation spiritually.
  
  Gen1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
  Now the earth was unformed and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters.
  
  Unformed and void also means wild and empty. How can something be wild and empty at the same time? If you fill a house with junk, its wild. And when you remove everything, its empty. This means that the earth (Man) was wild from earthly things, and empty in Spirit (dead).
  
  Why did the Spirit hover over the face of the waters? Because he had no place to rest (Remember the Spirit lives within us)
  
  Gen 1:3 And God said: 'Let there be light.' And there was light.
  Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness.
  
  Let there be light, he gave man Spiritual understanding.(Baptism)
  
  Gen 1:6 And God said: 'Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.'
  Gen 1:7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so.
  Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
  
  What is the waters being divided? That is the will of man, from the Will of Yahweh (God). Those with Spiritual understanding could now determine the difference.
  
  And God called the firmament Heaven - Heaven is therefore the state of being when we live in His will.
  
  And so it goes on, Then before we get to the creation of the first man... Ask yourself - When Yahweh said to Adam if you eat from this tree, you will surely die. Did Adam die ?
  No, he died Spiritually.... That is why we are born Spiritually dead, that is why we have to be reborn (Baptism).
  
  If you think Logically... How could light as we know it, be created before the Sun and the Moon ? We need to stop seeing the creation as a physical event... and see the spiritual - and then appply it to our lives.
  
  In the beginning, I was Spiritually dead, and YHWH created Light in me. I asked for His Spirit and I received.
  And then He seperated my will from His.... Now I feel conviction in Spirit when I disobey him. The earth that is spoken of in Genesis, is me.
  
  Now we move onto the creation of the first man.
  
  Gen 1:26 And God said: 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.'
  Gen 1:27 And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them
  
  If YHWH is Spirit, and he created me in His image... Then did he create me in body, or in Spirit ?
  
  He gave me dominion over the fish in the sea - That is the people who he wants me to bring to him (Fisher of men).
  
  Every creeping thing that creepeth over the earth - I am to bring not only church goers to His Glory, but even men who do not believe.
  
  Gen 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
  
  YHWH gave man his Spirit. Spiritual birth of the first man.
  
  Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden toward the cool of the day; and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
  
  How can YHWH walk with them in the garden if He is Spirit ? simple, they are spirit too. Once I was united with my Elohim in Spirit, I walked with him. He dwells within me.
  
  The point here is simply this. Christia
  
  Report
  
  by IvanN on April 9th, 2010
- IvanN ----Interesting
  
  Report
  
  by my2cents--Vote for Paul on August 13th, 2010
- That was my understanding after reading the Bible thanks for putting it in a great context.
  
  Report
  
  by Kelli_J on April 24th, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
11 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Mr_Natural Abstractor of the Quintessence on February 8th, 2009
The bible works best if you don't think too much about the details and don't ask questions. Just sing as loud as you can and keep sending $$ to your favorite preachers.

"AAAaaa-Mennnn!"

:-)
Comments
- Your belief should I get to offer money, i get to pray, i get to worship, I get to Love the creator, I get to follow the law. I get to love and trust in christ. some religion is forced you got to do it, But Christianity is You get to do it
  
  Report
  
  by mikekrnboy on February 16th, 2009
- Religions are businesses. They make profits from the prophets, and they get sweet tax breaks from the government. If religion was not profitable, the churches would disappear.
  
  Report
  
  by Mr_Natural Abstractor of the Quintessence on February 17th, 2009
- without financial the words of God would not spread as far. The tax breaks makes our donations and thites go furnther.
  
  Report
  
  by Kelli_J on April 24th, 2012
- Mixing these two chapters is not teaching the word of God based on what is written because this is two distinctive acts of God and when you do not teach them as so people lose there identity. Than you start to ask questions like how can all these Races/Nationalities come from two people on the face? Or how did Cain take a wife an where did she come from? Than these so claimed teachers of the word that claim to know the word will tell you Adam had daughters and Cain married Adams daughters this is another lie being taught to us out of ignorance. Adam did not have daughters until 800 years after Seth than he had son and daughters.
  
  Lets break this scripture down as it written in the context of which it is written let look at the Creation first.
  
  Genesis 1:27 So God created (man) in his own image, in the image of God created he him; MALE and FEMALE created he them.
  
  They did not say just two people here but God did say them which means two or more but God did not have to tell us this that is all we have to do is look around at all the Races/Nationality that we have over the face of the earth not including the Jewish race that is why Genesis 1:27 is speaking on the Creation of the Gentile Races. (the definition of Gentile means all other races other than the Jewish race)
  
  The word Create means to take "nothing" and make something.
  
  God Created (man) man is the subject here! Now who is this man? This is the (spirit man/our spirit man) why do we know this because it says in his own image, in the image of God. we know that flesh man is NOT in the image of God but our SPIRIT man is we all have a spirit man that lives in us until this flesh body dies than the spirit goes back to the Father! God is spirit this man spoken of here is in Gods image (spirit man). Than it says created he him! He has to go back to the subject which is man (spirit man) he/him is telling you the spirit man is a male/man. God did not create female spirits when we were with the Father why? Because He (God) did not have any reason to create them than, all the angles/messengers in the Bible was alway a man (and a young man) never a woman until Genesis 1:27 God needed a way to transport his children (souls) down to earth this is when God created female (a male/man with a womb the word male/man/men is representing the male spirit man that is also in the female body). So God took the (spirit man) put him into male and female bodies So in all actuality the woman: is a male with a womb to be able to reproduce after her and her mates kind to bring forth children of there own race kind after there own seed.
  1 Corinthians 15:38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed (sperm)his own body. (kind after kind, seed after seed)
  
  At this very moment God Created all the Races/Nations/Nationalities the "Gentile Races" (the word Gentile meaning all other races other than the Jews)these are the Jews that will be FORMED by God in Genesis 2:7 and all that bloodline from umbilical cord to umbilical cord. God used the words male and female instead of man and woman; God was showing us that He was focusing on their reproduction system that this is why he was creating them to replenish (replenish the earth not plenish this means to put back what was proof of an age before this earth age was) the earth. their job was going to be strictly to reproduce after there kind two of each race 2 white, 2 blacks, 2 Chinese 2 Germans 2 French etc,etc.
  
  Report
  
  by faith2727 on May 12th, 2012
- Some of these comments amaze me. The facts have been clearly explained how God created, Adam and Eve multiplied (greatly), and the gene pool, that was perfect, has deteriorated in a flawed environment (brought on by mankind's sin in Garden of Eden, corrupt generations before flood, and rebellion in building Tower of Babel). The sinful nature of man can be easily discerned in the ease with which some seem to blame God for a racial divide that is no more than the random geographic isolation of insignificant human variances, which have no distinct boundaries.
  
  Report
  
  by keepermen on May 19th, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
5 comments | Post one | Permalink
by bruceytom on June 17th, 2007
Free Radical, i see that you are reading carefully. Thank you. After reading the Bible many times, i have never found the terms, 'genetically', 'DNA', 'microbes', 'nuclear' 'dinosaurs','species' or any of the countless modern scientific terms we use. This is not a smart-alec reponse, but an observation. The Bible is not a science text, but when it touches on scientific matters it is accurate.

Deuteronomy 32:4, 5 show us that God's works are perfect. Applying specifically to a certain society, and by extension to all of us, it tells us that our defects are our own, linking this to 'acting ruinously'. Genesis 1:31 reveals that this perfect Creator saw his human creation as 'very good.'

The Bible, written for men of all ages and nations, is not highly technical, making it both comprehensible and easily translatable. An Eskimo or Pygmy (both highly intelligent, but formerly untechnical peoples)can understand the concept of error begetting error, even if they don't understand genetics.

I've learned to look at the Bible with a moderately critical eye and it has always met the challenge. Thanks for asking the question. Does this explanation sound reasonable?
Comments
- Yes, well-considered.
  
  Report
  
  by FreeRadical Jetpacking for Nelson on June 17th, 2007
- bruceytom, I've been following your answers with great interest. There is no question you are well read in the Bible, one day I hope to know it as well as you. Although sometimes you do confuse me with parts of your answers, and only because of where "I think" you studied. So I hate to hijack a thread, but I have to ask you a question, by part of your answer you make it sound like anyone, with out any out side help, just reading the Bible alone not only can understand it, but come to know God from it and it alone. Is that a fair statement?
  
  Report
  
  by cool runnins on June 18th, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink
by bruceytom on June 17th, 2007
This is a good and common question. Let's let the Bible speak and see its reasonable answer. Genesis 5:3, 4 tells us that Adam had "sons and daughters." Let's recall that he was created without defect and that he had no defective genes to pass on. About 2000 years later, faithful Abram (Abraham) married his half sister Sarai (Sarah)(Genesis 20, especially verse 12). About 500 years later, the human condition had become such that when God gave his law to Israel he forbade many close relations, including near cousins and siblings from marrying.

The point is that, for good reason, incest has become an abhorrent thing to us as a protection to society. In the beginning, it was not so. Among perfect and nealy perfect humans, incest as we think of it would not exist. Consider the fact that Eve was the very flesh of Adam, a virtual clone-Genesis 2:21-23.

Romans 5:12 and Acts 17:26 make it clear that there are no phantom "other" unnamed people not descended from the first human pair. The end of verse 26 "he decreed the set limits of the dwelling of men" may indicate his authority to allow or prohibit certain human relationships.

Knowing that we are all one human family can motivate us to love one another and to reject racial or ethnic prejudice.
Comments
- The Bible states that Adam was genetically perfect? Which passage is that?
  
  Report
  
  by FreeRadical Jetpacking for Nelson on June 17th, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by Joe-Speedy on December 28th, 2006
The book of Genesis (Genesis 5:4) indicates that Adam and Eve had many children. It is reasonable to assume that not all of them were sons. And I get your point about incestuous relations. Two people seems too small a gene pool.
Comments
- Adam was 800 yrs old,so you would think Adam had lots of Girls and boys.
  
  Report
  
  by Jesus is God on April 28th, 2009
- Mixing these two chapters is not teaching the word of God based on what is written because this is two distinctive acts of God and when you do not teach them as so people lose there identity. Than you start to ask questions like how can all these Races/Nationalities come from two people on the face? Or how did Cain take a wife an where did she come from? Than these so claimed teachers of the word that claim to know the word will tell you Adam had daughters and Cain married Adams daughters this is another lie being taught to us out of ignorance. Adam did not have daughters until 800 years after Seth than he had son and daughters.
  
  Lets break this scripture down as it written in the context of which it is written let look at the Creation first.
  
  Genesis 1:27 So God created (man) in his own image, in the image of God created he him; MALE and FEMALE created he them.
  
  They did not say just two people here but God did say them which means two or more but God did not have to tell us this that is all we have to do is look around at all the Races/Nationality that we have over the face of the earth not including the Jewish race that is why Genesis 1:27 is speaking on the Creation of the Gentile Races. (the definition of Gentile means all other races other than the Jewish race)
  
  The word Create means to take "nothing" and make something.
  
  God Created (man) man is the subject here! Now who is this man? This is the (spirit man/our spirit man) why do we know this because it says in his own image, in the image of God. we know that flesh man is NOT in the image of God but our SPIRIT man is we all have a spirit man that lives in us until this flesh body dies than the spirit goes back to the Father! God is spirit this man spoken of here is in Gods image (spirit man). Than it says created he him! He has to go back to the subject which is man (spirit man) he/him is telling you the spirit man is a male/man. God did not create female spirits when we were with the Father why? Because He (God) did not have any reason to create them than, all the angles/messengers in the Bible was alway a man (and a young man) never a woman until Genesis 1:27 God needed a way to transport his children (souls) down to earth this is when God created female (a male/man with a womb the word male/man/men is representing the male spirit man that is also in the female body). So God took the (spirit man) put him into male and female bodies So in all actuality the woman: is a male with a womb to be able to reproduce after her and her mates kind to bring forth children of there own race kind after there own seed.
  1 Corinthians 15:38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed (sperm)his own body. (kind after kind, seed after seed)
  
  At this very moment God Created all the Races/Nations/Nationalities the "Gentile Races" (the word Gentile meaning all other races other than the Jews)these are the Jews that will be FORMED by God in Genesis 2:7 and all that bloodline from umbilical cord to umbilical cord. God used the words male and female instead of man and woman; God was showing us that He was focusing on their reproduction system that this is why he was creating them to replenish (replenish the earth not plenish this means to put back what was proof of an age before this earth age was) the earth. their job was going to be strictly to reproduce after there kind two of each race 2 white, 2 blacks, 2 Chinese 2 Germans 2 French etc,etc.
  
  Report
  
  by faith2727 on May 12th, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Roger Kovaciny on December 5th, 2006
Incest was only defined as a sin in the book of Leviticus, and for a number of fairly obvious reasons. If you take Scripture as a serious history, then Adam and Eve were created without genetic defects and only with the course of time did various mutations creep into human DNA through cosmic rays, background radiation, carcinogens, viruses and so forth. Therefore an incestuous marriage would not have been problematic, and it was God's will that we all come from the same two progenitors so that (a) nobody could say he was racially better than other people and (b) everyone could be included when the second Adam, Jesus Christ, came to undo the damage done by the first one.

And of course an incestuous marriage is considerably less bad than the usual incest, which is almost always the statutory rape of an underage girl by a male relative.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Valparaiso on December 4th, 2006
To answer the question the bible states that Adam and Eve had other sons and daughters. In other words they had daughters.
Comments
- that still leaves incest as the only option tho
  
  Report
  
  by keetypie1 on December 5th, 2006
- Yeah, but it doesn't mention the birth of these other sons and daughters until after Cain married.
  
  Report
  
  by AntigoneRising on December 5th, 2006
- The text of it is very clear. The only reason that people say there are daughters at the time of Cain is because they add them in. The thought process is something like this (I know, I used to think this way), "Adam and Eve definitely were the first people. That is true. My preacher says so, and I believe it. The Bible says Cain married. The Bible is always true. The only way both of these can be true is if Cain married his sister. Therefore, that is how it definitely happened." The problems with this from a logical and critical thinking perspective are enough to make one cry.
  
  Report
  
  by AntigoneRising on October 23rd, 2007
- It's stated quite clearly in Genesis 4:16-17. Cain found a wife in the "Land of Nod, on the east of Eden." Maybe a tribe created by some other god?
  
  Report
  
  by Sandman on June 23rd, 2008
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
4 comments | Post one | Permalink
by spreader on March 21st, 2012
No. For, in Adam’s original perfect state his children would have been born in perfection. (Deut. 32:4) There would have been no family weaknesses to be passed on and accentuated by the marriage of near relatives, as is the case today, when the sinful human race has greatly deteriorated and many genetic defects exist. Even after Adam had sinned, his descendants lived as long as 969 years in the days before the Flood.—Gen. 5:27.

It took a long time for genetic defects to become so numerous and so grouped in family lines that it became dangerous to the offspring for close relatives to marry. Even Abraham, some 2,000 years after the creation of Adam, married his half sister. (Gen. 20:12) Not until God gave the Mosaic law (about 500 years later) did He prohibit close family marriage unions among the people of Israel.—Lev. 18:6-18.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Sympho de Proggy on February 8th, 2009
Cain and Abel were Eve's first children.
not necessarily her only.
.
i don't know if that's how the story actually goes, but that's what makes sense.
Comments
- Quite correct. Seth is named as a third son, an the Bible records that other sons and daughters were born to Adam as well.
  
  Report
  
  by edndori on February 11th, 2009
- That is Not correct that is the way man teaches you which is not based on Gods word Christ warned us to be very careful of men and there traditions that make void the word of God.
  
  Roman 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen
  How many times have we heard that Adam and Eve sin!!! Well that is a lie also Adam did not sin in fact he was NOT even deceived.
  
  1Timothy 2:14 And Adam was NOT deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression (transgression meaning sin)
  So why do they continue to do these things when it is written in the word of God it is like they want us to ignore what the word say even if you are reading it with your own eyes. I confronted a Minister with this and he told that Adam and Eve did sin I was incorrect from saying this so I just showed him the scripture that is said Adam did not sin and his mouth dropped and he look at the front of my Bible as to see if I was reading some a cult book or something. I have the King James Bible the only thing different is that I study to show myself approved.
  
  2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth
  
  I do not speak or teach anything that I have not study and research in the Hebrew and Greek languages to find it true meaning. It is very important make them tell you the truth or stop going to them this is our Salvation the are dealing with. I am going to send this to you on God Creation it is not true that Adam and Eve was the first people on the face of the earth.
  
  Mixing these two chapters is not teaching the word of God based on what is written because this is two distinctive acts of God and when you do not teach them as so people lose there identity. Than you start to ask questions like how can all these Races/Nationalities come from two people on the face? Or how did Cain take a wife an where did she come from? Than these so claimed teachers of the word that claim to know the word will tell you Adam had daughters and Cain married Adams daughters this is another lie being taught to us out of ignorance. Adam did not have daughters until 800 years after Seth than he had son and daughters.
  
  Lets break this scripture down as it written in the context of which it is written let look at the Creation first.
  
  Genesis 1:27 So God created (man) in his own image, in the image of God created he him; MALE and FEMALE created he them.
  
  They did not say just two people here but God did say them which means two or more but God did not have to tell us this that is all we have to do is look around at all the Races/Nationality that we have over the face of the earth not including the Jewish race that is why Genesis 1:27 is speaking on the Creation of the Gentile Races. (the definition of Gentile means all other races other than the Jewish race)
  
  The word Create means to take "nothing" and make something.
  
  God Created (man) man is the subject here! Now who is this man? This is the (spirit man/our spirit man) why do we know this because it says in his own image, in the image of God. we know that flesh man is NOT in the image of God but our SPIRIT man is we all have a spirit man that lives in us until this flesh body dies than the spirit goes back to the Father! God is spirit this man spoken of here is in Gods image (spirit man). Than it says created he him! He has to go back to the subject which is man (spirit man) he/him is telling you the spirit man is a male/man. God did not create female spirits when we were with the Father why? Because He (God) did not have any reason to create them than, all the angles/messengers in the Bible was alway a man (and a young man) never a woman until Genesis 1:27 God needed a way to transport his children (souls) down to earth this is when God created female (a male/man with a womb the word male/man/men is representing the male spirit man that is also i
  
  Report
  
  by faith2727 on May 12th, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Mr. Meaulnes on October 17th, 2007
Ding ding ding!!!
Yet another way that some parts of the Bible make absolutely no sense.
Comments
- i know. it's totally crazy. i emailed you back by the way-i don't know if you got it or not.
  
  Report
  
  by doodlethenoodle on October 17th, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by Morg the Army wife on September 21st, 2007
shhhh. It's fits in because we say it fits!

no really, later in the Bible it says that they had a bunch of children. I'm sure someone else will answer with a specific verse ;)
Comments
- Haha! So, that part is just disregarded?!
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 21st, 2007
- Even if they had a bunch of children, there would still have to be inbreeding at some point...
  
  Report
  
  by Ender is back.. And slightly confused. on September 21st, 2007
- I LOVE your first sentence Morgenstern!!!! Wish I could give more points for just your humor:)
  
  Report
  
  by Babycakes on September 21st, 2007
- It's a great answer, but it just annoys me with the way these Christians just ignore the bits of the Bible they think dont quite make sense.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 21st, 2007
- oh yes, I agree, in fact, I have an answer that says so ;) I was just pointing out that I don't think the inbreeding occurred between the mother and son or father and daughters but rather between sisters and brothers. However, I don't remember anything in the Bible saying who mated with who so it's really just an opinion. let me look up that link for you...
  
  Report
  
  by Morg the Army wife on September 21st, 2007
- gonzo, I am a christian, but there are a lot of things in various christian sects that I feel disagree outright with the bible itself and are downright stupid. My first sentence is part of that but I didn't want to start pointing fingers. I'd love to have a chat off-site, if you have email or AIM.
  
  Report
  
  by Morg the Army wife on September 21st, 2007
- I do indeed have an MSN address, but I shall give it to you on the understanding that you do not give it out t another living soul for as long as you live.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 21st, 2007
- ahh here we go : http://www.answerbag.com/answer_edit/1383708 my email is morgensternAB@gmail.com. From there I'll move you to my real email address. I wonder if there's a term for that, email laundering perhaps?
  
  Report
  
  by Morg the Army wife on September 21st, 2007
- I cant seem to be able to add you . If you like, add my address it's:
  power_2_the_music@hotmail.com
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 21st, 2007
- quick! edit it away ;)
  
  Report
  
  by Morg the Army wife on September 21st, 2007
- Oh snap! Now I'm going to stalk you both.
  
  Report
  
  by Ender is back.. And slightly confused. on September 21st, 2007
- oh no, mine's a front ;)
  
  Report
  
  by Morg the Army wife on September 21st, 2007
- A front? Are you AB Mafia?
  
  Report
  
  by Ender is back.. And slightly confused. on September 21st, 2007
- Mine's a back.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 21st, 2007
- Alright. Now all we need is a side to side and we're ready to hit the road.
  
  Report
  
  by Ender is back.. And slightly confused. on September 21st, 2007
- I just hate spam. I even blocked my mother-in-law.
  
  Report
  
  by Morg the Army wife on September 21st, 2007
- HAHHAHHA!!!! Im going to have SPAM for my tea. Check out the spamsite www.spam.com
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 21st, 2007
- did you know that folks in hawaii eat more spam than in any other state?
  
  Report
  
  by Morg the Army wife on September 21st, 2007
- That is tre bizzare.
  
  Report
  
  by Ender is back.. And slightly confused. on September 21st, 2007
- seriously, they have several Spam cookbooks, and it's on the menu at both McDonalds and Burger King there.
  
  Report
  
  by Morg the Army wife on September 21st, 2007
- No way! I personally think it's spamtastic.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 21st, 2007
- It used to be the kind of cheap alternative in Britian. Everyone used to have spam....
  spam and chips... spam sandwitch... anything at all.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 21st, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
22 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Perryman on December 5th, 2006
Yes, Adam and Eve were the first humans. The firstborn was named Cain, and the second, Abel. In a fit of rage, Cain committed the first murder and killed his brother, Abel. Afterward, the record says that Cain married and produced children. The question often asked is: �Where did Cain get his wife? Surely, Eve was the only woman alive then.��Genesis 4:1-17.
Some Bible critics allege that here is a �Bible contradiction� Such doubts though spring from a limited knowledge of the Bible.
In fact, the Bible clearly shows that Adam and Eve had many children.
We read: �And the days of Adam after his fathering Seth [another son] came to be eight hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.� (Genesis 5:4)
Hence, there were other women in those days, apart from Eve. Cain married one of his sisters. Later, of course, God forbade marriage among such close relatives.�Leviticus 18:9; 20:17.
Even scientists say that we are all related through our DNA. The Bible shows in Genesis that people had much longer life spans
5,000 years ago, and remember that Adam and Eve started off as perfect humans.
Comments
- You still have a timeline problem, because the birth of Seth came after Cain married. The other sons and daughters came after the birth of Seth.
  
  Report
  
  by AntigoneRising on December 5th, 2006
- of course we're all related by dna, we're the same species! and just because a person is perfect doesnt mean they cant have mutated grandchildren if their kids did each other.
  
  btw its absolutely impossible for people to live for 800 years, even if they were perfect. what relevance does that have to my question anyway?
  
  Report
  
  by keetypie1 on December 5th, 2006
- So, Perryman, the "perfect" humans were nonetheless able to sin so grievously that we all exist in a fallen world.
  
  Cain certainly did NOT marry one of his sisters. Genesis 4:16-17; he found her "out of the presence of the Lord", "in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden." Clearly a different (non-Adamic) tribe.
  
  Report
  
  by Sandman on June 23rd, 2008
- Sandman. Who did this "other tribe" descend from?? LOL
  
  Report
  
  by Perryman on March 19th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
4 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Sunblynd 5.0 on December 4th, 2006
Adam and Eve were not the first humans and Eve was not the first woman, biblical mythology states a woman by the name of Litlith was first created for Adam, but since she refused to be subserviant she vanished into the woods and scattered back into the dust, during the second chapter God then decided to take a rib from Adam and fashion Eve from that and she was much more subserviant to Adams whim.

This is all mythology, written to capture the imagination of children and illiterate peoples of the time, obvioiusly with all our great advances in science and technology and history, we have far to progress because people believe these myths to be fact unto this day, it's audacity is appalling to the critical thought process. Yes it is a fact that many of the peoples of the human race may in some instances be inbred, we were not actually to bright back in those days. But it happened none the less.

The bible starts human existance made perfect just as you see us today about $6,000 years ago, but mind you these biblical creation texts were borrowed from the texts of the Sumarians, and incorporated into the Bible as we know today, but the Sumarian texts were much more violent in their theory of creation, were as the Hebrew God wove a more magical and kinder tale.

Science dates human existance starting about $270,000 years ago, which is factually coinciding with Darwins evolution theory, with critical thinking and wieghing of facts the bible is kind of weak next to the insurmountable evidence science has in it's arsenals.

I used the $ sign to clarify how the accounts of religion and science balance out, as you can see the checking account of religion is rather small and probably mismanaged, where as the scientific numbers seem to have pretty accurate accounting skills. ha ha sarchasm.
A rating would be nice.
Comments
- I like it. Six thousand dollars years ago. LOL
  
  Report
  
  by Anonymous on December 4th, 2006
- thanx i think, i got a bit confused lol. i just wanted to see how the christians thought it was possible to have a healthy human race with that much inbreeding :)
  
  Report
  
  by keetypie1 on December 5th, 2006
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Stormarm on March 21st, 2012
How many times, in how many different ways, are people going to as this same question instead of actually looking at the answers already given?
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Friartuck on March 20th, 2012
Yep, absolutely. The YEC's enthusiastically endorse the idea - banging away (excuse the pun) about perfect DNA so no defects or some such nonsense.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by seahorse on May 2nd, 2011
Where Did Cain Find His Wife?
▪ “If Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel, where did Cain’s wife come from?” Although this is often asked as a trick question by Bible skeptics, the Bible does provide sufficient detail to give a satisfactory answer.
Genesis chapters 3 and 4 present the following information: (1) Eve was “the mother of everyone living.” (2) Time elapsed between the birth of Cain and his offering the sacrifice that was rejected by God. (3) Following his banishment to become “a wanderer and a fugitive,” Cain worried that ‘anyone finding him’ might try to kill him. (4) God set up a sign to protect Cain, indicating that either his siblings or other relatives might try to kill him. (5) “Afterward,” Cain had intercourse with his wife in “the land of Fugitiveness.”—Genesis 3:20; 4:3, 12, 14-17.
From the above, we can rightly conclude that Cain’s wife was a descendant of Eve born on an unknown date. Genesis 5:4 acknowledges that during his 930 years of life, Adam “became father to sons and daughters.” Of course, the Bible does not specify that Cain’s wife was Eve’s daughter. Indeed, the fact that she is mentioned after Cain’s banishment indicates that enough time had passed that she could even have been one of Adam and Eve’s granddaughters. Hence, The Amplified Old Testament describes Cain’s wife simply as “one of Adam’s offspring.”
Nineteenth-century Bible commentator Adam Clarke speculated that God’s establishing a sign as a result of Cain’s fear came about because several generations of Adam’s descendants already existed—enough “to found several villages.”
That Cain married his sister or a later female descendant of Adam through the marriage of any of Adam’s sons or daughters is viewed by some societies today as unthinkable. This is usually because of societal taboos or fear of genetic defects. Nevertheless, F. LaGard Smith comments in The Narrated Bible in Chronological Order: “It is altogether likely that these first brothers and sisters enter into marriages with each other, despite the sense of inappropriateness which would be felt should that occur in following generations.” Also, it is noteworthy that it was not until Moses received God’s laws for the nation of Israel in 1513 B.C.E. that intercourse between such close relatives was specifically forbidden.—Leviticus 18:9, 17, 24.
Today, we are millenniums away from the perfection once possessed by our original parents. The effect that genetics and heredity have on us might not have been a factor for them. Furthermore, recent studies, such as one published in the Journal of Genetic Counseling, show that unions between first cousins face lower risks of having children with birth defects than is widely perceived. Reasonably, such issues would not have been a serious concern during Adam’s life span or even prior to Noah’s day. Thus, we can conclude that Cain’s wife was one of his female relatives.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by nightcrawler0_2 on May 2nd, 2011
(Ge 3:20) “Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she had to become the mother of everyone living.”

All humans were to be the offspring of Adam and Eve.

(Ge 5:3, 4) “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. And the days of Adam after his fathering Seth came to be eight hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.”

One of Adam’s sons was Cain, and one of Adam’s daughters must have become Cain’s wife. At that time in human history when humans still had outstanding physical health and vitality, as indicated by the length of their lives, the likelihood of passing on defects as a result of marrying a close relative was not great. After some 2,500 years of human history, however, when mankind’s physical condition had greatly deteriorated, Jehovah gave to Israel laws forbidding incest.

(Ge 4:16, 17) “Cain went away from the face of Jehovah and took up residence in the land of Fugitiveness [or, Nod] to the east of Eden. Afterward Cain had intercourse with his wife [“knew his wife,” that is, intimately so, KJ, RS; “lay with his wife,” NE] and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch.”

Notice that Cain did not first meet his wife in the land to which he fled, as if she were from another family. Rather, it was there that he had sexual relations with her to produce a son.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Account Closed on February 17th, 2009
The Bible written by man inspired by God is not a history book of every single event that happened. Only chosen stories of the time. Just because it does not say it does not mean it did not happen.

Example: How many different fruit trees are there and how many is mentioned in the Bible. God made man. It does not say God made only Adam and only Eve. They were written about to show a point of importance.
Comments
- Good point
  
  Report
  
  by Iluvyou on October 24th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by Anonymous on February 17th, 2009
Adam and Eve had other sons and daughters (Genesis 5:4). Obviously Cain's wife (Genesis 4:17) was one of his sisters.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by edndori on February 11th, 2009
Able was killed by Cain. No progeny.
The world population comes from the Sons of Adam and Eve marrying their Daughters.
Genesis 5:3-4
3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own alikeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
4 And the days of aAdam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
Comments
- Okay. That's the explanation, I suppose. But that means all those brothers and sisters...
  
  Report
  
  by HungryGuy on February 13th, 2009
- It gets more complicated than that!
  With an overlap of up to 9 generations there were probably any number of cross generational marriages too:
  Uncle and niece, Aunt and grand nephew etc.!
  
  Report
  
  by edndori on February 13th, 2009
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink
by designer is wearing a ....... on February 8th, 2009
What about Seth, the forgotten one..He is the one who started the blood line of Noah...
Comments
- Well, okay, there's Cain and Abel and Seth. That still leaves an obvious lack of females in the mix...
  
  Report
  
  by HungryGuy on February 8th, 2009
- That pretty much just leaves Eve...Ewwwwwwww!!!!
  
  Report
  
  by designer is wearing a ....... on February 8th, 2009
- Cain had his own offspring called the Kenites they were also against God and anything to to with God but these people were of the Jewish race and now they are mixed in and you cant tell who they are because a Jew is a Jew. This is what Christ was teaching us about in Matthew when he taught the Parable of the wheat and the tares (Cain offspring those Jews (tares)that are mixed in with the Jews (wheat) Christ said leave them alone in fear the you may up root the wheat instead of the tares because they look alike meaning they are both Jew on generation brought forth by Cain and his offsprings the Kenites and the Jew brought down from the Adamic bloodline of Adam (Jewish race)
  
  Hope this helped
  
  Report
  
  by faith2727 on May 12th, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
3 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Glenn Blaylock on September 21st, 2007
Anonymous referenced the following verse in his answer, but Gonzo apparently couldn't be bothered to look it up. So, let me just give it here.

"And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:" (Genesis 5:4)

Only three of Adam and Eve's children are actually named in the Bible (Cain, Able, and Seth). However, as you can see, the Bible indicates that they actually had an unspecified number of other children including both sons and daughters. Seeing as the Bible also tells us that Adam lived to be 930 years of age, there is the potential for them to have produced a whole lot of children. (There is no indication as to how long either of them were able to actually produce children, but if their periods of fertility were proportional to their life spans, the that would represent several centuries worth of children.)
Comments
- It *does* clearly say (somewhere in that book) that there were 2 sons. But, I've been told 'oh, you just ignore the old testiment!" Why would the Bible just not bother to mention the other children?
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 22nd, 2007
- No, Genesis 4 tells the story of how Adam and Eve had Cain and Able and then Cain slew Able out of jealousy. This is followed by a mention that they then had Seth. No where in the account does it say that these were the only children that Adam and Eve had. This is then followed by chapter 5 where we are specifically told that they had other sons and daughters. I have never seen a verse in the Bible that specifically says that Adam and Eve only had two children. So, at this point, the ball is in your court. Provide the reference that backs up your contention that the Bible says that they only had two children. Until you do that, your argument has no evidence to support it.
  .
  As for your question of why the Bible does not bother the mention other children, what do you think the verse I quoted above its talking about? It specifically says that Adam begat sons (plural) and daughters (plural) in the eight hundred years that followed the birth of Seth.
  
  Report
  
  by Glenn Blaylock on September 22nd, 2007
- So, then what happend? They interbred anyway?
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 22nd, 2007
- Seth is born in Ch. 5:3. This is AFTER THE FALL. But then Seth marries and has children, as Cain did Genesis 4:17; so Cain's son Enoch and Seth's son Enos were first cousins. Seth's "marriage" may or may not have been incestuous (it isn't stated), but Cain's wife was from the Land of Nod, not from the tribe of Adam. Cain is less culpable than his younger brother, incest-wise. UNLESS Seth also went outside the tribe to find a girl over in the next county, from a tribe created by some other god or goddess.
  
  Report
  
  by Sandman on June 23rd, 2008
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
4 comments | Post one | Permalink
by D__Yankee on September 21st, 2007
Gen. 5 vs 4, Adam and Eve had many children. And the laws of incest had their origin only at the time of Moses. (Lev. 18-20)
Gen. 5 vs 5 states Adam lived 930 yrs!
Comments
- Does it or does it not state in the Bible that there were 2 sons or are you chosing which bits are true?
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on September 21st, 2007
- What's not to understand?
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on October 23rd, 2007
- No where does it claim there were no other children? So the Bible can miss out important parts of how we 'came to be' if it likes?
  Why would it just not mention these other children? It doesnt make sense to me.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on October 23rd, 2007
- The reasons I have for these questions are quite irrelevant. Seeing as you're struggling to answer, I wont persue the matter. As for it being 'vitally important', do you not think that the creation of human life is an important matter to be discussed? And who am I to decide what should be in the Bible? I'm no one but a human. Same as the people that wrote in it in the first place.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on October 24th, 2007
- Yet again, you're simply criticizing my words as oppose to answering my questions.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on October 24th, 2007
- Are you unable to answer, or simply choosing not to bother?
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on October 24th, 2007
- I havent yet seen this 'very good answer', mate.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on October 24th, 2007
- Probably. I give up. I can see Im talking to a religious fanatic. Seeing as there is no "very good answer', it's hard to see it.
  
  Report
  
  by Gonzo on October 24th, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
8 comments | Post one | Permalink
by AntigoneRising on August 21st, 2007
Whether you believe humans started by creation or by evolution, we get back to the same issue. Yes, at some point the species was propogated by closely related individuals.

As for Adam and Eve as literal characters in a literally true story, they didn't exist.
Comments
- thats was sooo gunna be my answer word for word!! well done!
  
  Report
  
  by Janie on August 21st, 2007
- When talking about evolution, they were not necessarily opropogated by related individuals, they could have evolved in groups, or when they were related individuals, it could have been something as little as bacteria, where it does't really matter if they're related or not, or they might not even have produced offspring sexually. There is lot of possibilities where it might not have been incest, but there is only one way it could have been done according to bible...
  
  Report
  
  by Romiex69x on August 21st, 2007
- were you by any chance, i scientology major? or perhaps geology?
  
  Report
  
  by Janie on August 21st, 2007
- Thank you, Melanie.
  
  Report
  
  by AntigoneRising on August 21st, 2007
- I disagree, Romie. When you are talking about humans (not bacteria, but the human species by the time it evolved), you are then talking about individuals who had to have evolved the same characteristics at the same time (relatively, when both were fertil) in order to genetically pass them on to their offspring. I don't see this happening in large groups. I'm an evolutionist, btw.
  
  Report
  
  by AntigoneRising on August 21st, 2007
- i dont know much about evolution, i'm an amature, read what i can but dont really get taught anything, but i've come to the same conclusion as you. :)
  
  Report
  
  by Janie on August 21st, 2007
- Not scienetology or geology major, did take some courses in college, just like everyone else who attends college, but how about this, the species slowly evolve, from bacteria all the way to humans, some might be more evolved some less, but by reproducing together, they balance it out, they don't have to be related. There could have been lot of individuals already, some evolve, have offspring with less evolved, and the offspring is already more evolved etc... Do you get what I'm trying to say, having hard time trying to explain it.
  
  Report
  
  by Romiex69x on August 21st, 2007
- You miss that individuals that vary too far genetically cannot reproduce. Species within the same genus can, but their offspring are sterile (cannot reproduce).
  
  Report
  
  by AntigoneRising on August 21st, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
8 comments | Post one | Permalink
by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 20th, 2012
A literal reading of the bible indicates incest. Also consider the grandchildren of Noah after the flood.

Note that both scenarios are quite unlikely.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Starmaster on March 20th, 2012
Well, the same thing with evolution. I saw a very interesting documentary on human evolution, and it says that there is one "Eve"....that all humans descend from that first "human"....so, her kids created a big time incest period in time!
Comments
- but you assume that Eve was created human at the time....and not over time.
  
  Report
  
  by DA BEN DAN yanggui zi on March 20th, 2012
- the mechanism by which evolution works makes that impossible.
  
  evolution is not something that happens to a single creature.
  evolution works on a group.
  the whole point is that, within said group, all members are very similar in their DNA, else they would not be able to reproduce.
  
  this makes singling out the first member to "change" species much like looking at a grayscale and trying to single out the point where "gray" turns into "light gray"
  
  here's a visual aid:
  
  Report
  
  by Sympho de Proggy on March 20th, 2012
- Please cite a source for the "one mother" hypothesis.
  
  Report
  
  by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 20th, 2012
- ErgoStep: I am sorry, it was a TV documentary that I saw on Cable more than five years ago. I will try to remember ....
  
  Report
  
  by Starmaster on March 21st, 2012
- Here it is. Read the Common Fallacies section.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve
  
  Report
  
  by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 23rd, 2012
- Thanks, ErgoStep. This is the foundation of the documentary I am talking about. They also talked a lot about the "out of Africa migration".
  
  Report
  
  by Starmaster on March 23rd, 2012
- You do not understand it. There was no incest. See the diagram.
  
  Report
  
  by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 23rd, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
7 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Meg on April 7th, 2008
I never take the bible literally. It's the morals from those stories that you should concentrate on.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Friartuck on October 17th, 2007
Yep - folks like Answers in Genesis will tell you that sisters shagged brothers, sons may have shagged mom and so on but it was all okay then because our genes were so nice and near-perfect.

The mental contortions one must go through eh?
Comments
- hahaha nice tuck. :)
  
  Report
  
  by doodlethenoodle on October 17th, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by Anonymous on September 21st, 2007
I'm more concerned with how my beliefs in loving my neighbor fit in with my actual behaviour...
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
Yes, it was necessary initially to marry brothers and sisters. But DNA was much purer and freer of problems. It was only later that these developed.
However, I must add that this abhorrence of "being related" is very modern and western. Up till very recent times, it was quite common for people marrying to be related to some degree or other, as communities were smaller and choices fewer. If you trace any family tree, you will come across many first cousin marriages.
Unless you have hereditary syndromes such as Cystic Fibrosis, it isn't as much of a problem as people in developed nations think.
All British lines cross in the 12th century (I have found one definite and several probables for my parents), and two of my closest friends appear to be related to me around that time too.
All Europeans are descended from Charlemagne King of the Franks (Mathematician Jack Lee has shown how this works in his article "Everyone is Descended from Charlemagne) who died in 814 AD.
Many Europeans have bloodlines in common with Queen Philippa of Hainault (wife of Edward III of England), whose ancestry goes back through Byzantium, Armenia, Georgia, Central Asia to China and North India in the 4th century AD. I am one of them.
8% of Asian men and .05% of all men on this earth descend from Genghis Khan (d 1227) and all Jewish people of surname Cohen are descended from one ancestor, presumaby Levi, the first High Priest of Israel. These are all proven by DNA.

As for brother-sister marriage: one book I have in my possession says, discussing the identity of the historical personage with the most intra-familial marriages:
"Forst de Battaglia thought that the record lay with Antiochus X Eusebius, King of Syria, who died in 92 BC and who as a result of brother-sister marriages had only 24 ancestors where any normal person would have had 256 and where even Alphonso XIII had 51. It seems to me, however, that these figures could be bettered as the result of both-sister and uncle-niece marriages amongst the ancestors of Queen Cleopatra Berenice of Egypt. She was the wife and step-mother of Ptolemy XI, the last legitimate male of the dynasty, until he murdered her nineteen days after their wedding."

The Incas of Peru, the Hawaiian royal family...many of the Hindu royals of the past, actually preferred brother sister marriages, which they saw as keeping the bloodline of the gods intact. It might seem strange, even appalling to us, but not to them.

However, for Jews and Christians, we know that God, in His wisdom, said "No more brother-sister marriages" after a certain period in history (after Abraham, whose wife, Sarah was his half-sister) presumably because He knew the dangers of a too closely related bloodline, even if we did not.
Comments
- I have read a pulitzer prize winning book called "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by UCLA professor of geography Jared Diamond http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel
  
  It does not agree or coincide with your assumations. Please re-elaborate on your resources of information.
  
  Report
  
  by Sunblynd 5.0 on June 17th, 2007
- Having a quick look at the wiki article, I cannot see what the problem is. I am not talking culture but DNA. And I have given no ASSUMPTIONS (not ASSUMATIONS) because assumptions are based on no evidence.
  My sources in this case are:
  1) my own genealogical research, which has been going on for over 30 years. I know who I am descended from, and the number of people whose lines overlap with mine up on the net alone is proof of the close relationships of British and Europeans.
  2) Jack Lee's article, quoted above, proves, mathematically that Charlemagne is AN ancestor of all Europeans. Once again, access to genealogical records opens up the possibility for many ordinary people like myself to find ONE royal line in their ancestry, which will, inevitably lead back to Charlemagne.
  3) The book I quoted is an old one "Everybody has Roots" by Anthony Camp. It came out around the time "Roots" was showing on TV, and is very outdated, but the relationships between the Ptolemys are historical
  
  Report
  
  by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
- and unchanged over the 30 years since the book was written. It may be even that some of the unsure relationships between the Ptolemys have been found in more recently discovered documents and inscriptions.
  
  The results of the Cohen DNA studies are everywhere on the net. Try just this one: http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/Cohanim-DNA-Connection.htm
  but there are many others.
  As for the Incas, the Hawaiians and other groups whose royalty practiced brother-sister marriage, these are historically attestable. You can find that information anywhere. As I said, it was usually only in the royal families, but ordinary people still married their cousins and close relatives in preference to outsiders. That, too, is a given. I have studied anthropology and have done considerable work amongst South East Asians, especially the Balinese, who were strong cousin-marriers.
  
  I cannot see what the problem is, Sunblynd.
  
  Report
  
  by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
- I protest that certain lines may have crossed, but not all, are descendent from one individual, the thought just seems ridiculous to me.
  
  Report
  
  by Sunblynd 5.0 on June 17th, 2007
- It may seem ridiculous to YOU, but it is mathematically provable, and becoming more and more clearer, the more genealogy is being carried out. The fact is that, mathematically, the chances of a European NOT being descended from Charlemagne are infinitely insignificant. That does not mean that we are not also descended from other people around at the same time as Charlemagne. That goes without saying. Some of my lines go via his kin, and others through people not related to him (such as the Viking chiefs of Scandinavia), but, like it or not, each European is going to have at least one line, perhaps more (as I said I gave up counting around 30, not even including all the ancestors who turned out to be exactly the same) descended from Charlemagne. I would like to see the odds with an unnamed ancestor of Genghis Khan for Asians too. If 8% of Asian men are descended from GK himself, considerably more will be descended from any ancestor of his who lived about the same time as Charlemagne.
  
  Report
  
  by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
- As I, and all descendants of Philippa of Hainault (who lived in the late 13th century) have at least one descent from the Chinese Emperor of Xian in the 4th century, which seems pretty sure by modern studies, then my educated guess is that by the time of Christ, most lines in Asia, Europe and North Africa will have crossed somewhere. It's a fact of life that Eurasians/North Africans are linked within the last 2 000 years.
  
  Report
  
  by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
- sing, your trying to hard to convince me of your point of view. It is my recommendation that you read the book Guns, Germs, and Steel. Though true most cultures intermarry with eachother, it gives an excellent explanation of the spread of the human populus. Not spread from one line, but from many.
  
  Report
  
  by Sunblynd 5.0 on June 17th, 2007
- I am not talking about the cultures of thousands of years ago. I am talking about the last 2-5000 years. If my ancestors were from as far away as China and North India in the 4th century AD, and I am one of many online with the same lines, then Europe and Asia have crossed greatly during that short time, although before that they would have been much more isolated.
  I am not trying to convince you of anything. You can believe what you want. But you are basing your opposition on a book that deals with the spread of cultures many thousands of years ago. I am well aware of cultural spread. As I said, I have studied Anthropology at University. I am also a linguist and know the linguistic history of humanity quite well. I have written and reviewed history and genealogy. I am talking about recent populations, and what I have written is historically attestable, and your writer would agree with me. He is talking about things that happened long before what I am discussing ie the close
  
  Report
  
  by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
- relationships between the people of Europe, their common descent from Charlemagne only 1200 years ago. That is a given.
  As to the relationships between all humans, science also shows a descent from one woman, genetic EVE. Linguistics shows a descent from one area, and prehistory also shows the same.
  In between the first spread of humans and 841 AD, there is a long time, in which human populations split up and diversified. But there came a time, coinciding with the growth of urban societies, writing and trade,(not to mention conquest) when they, once again began to interact and mix. That is why, if you find people who have contributed to the National Geographic Human Genome project, you will find that they have ancestors from quite diverse parts of the world. One Italian gentleman I was in touch with had a marker on his DNA which showed a single line from Uzbekhistan. I can understand this now, having found that I too have central Asian blood. Your writer is not contradicting what I am saying. He is simply talking about a different part of history, the time before the remingling began, about 5-2000 years ago.
  
  Report
  
  by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
9 comments | Post one | Permalink
by teknimage on December 28th, 2006
I actually asked this of a friend of mine who is a Born Again Christian. He told me that just because the Bible doesn't mention anyone other than Adam and Eve doesn't mean there weren't other people living outside of Eden. I understand what he was saying, but that's just the kind of reasoning that leaves me scratching my head about those who profess unquestioning belief in the Bible.
Comments
- I think he is mistaken.
  
  Report
  
  by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
- The point of bible revelation is that sin entered into the world throgu Adam and was dealt with bit he last Adam who is Jesus. If there were a multitude of Adams that makes the whole issue of sin being passed on through the generations a nonsense and so therefore the bible is onaccurate, flawed and unreliable. I suggest yo tell your born again friend to go back to his bible and get some good biblical theology. Advice from one born again to another!
  
  Report
  
  by peterpam on June 17th, 2007
- Spot on peterpam.
  
  Report
  
  by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
3 comments | Post one | Permalink
by ----------- on December 28th, 2006
Hey, always knew there was incest in the religious circles. Just look at some of their arguments. No surprise there.
Comments
- Look at my post....it is not just religious circles....DNA points out that you are included.
  
  Report
  
  by singwell-is off researching a lot on June 17th, 2007
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by Philip_H9732 on March 21st, 2012
It had to be. I suppose the argument is that it was possible (of course they would have had to have daughters too) as their genes would not have been contaminated so bearing children would not have caused issues. Since they lived for very long time they would have had orgy of some sort bearing children (the whole clan)till they were perhaps 500 years or so....
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by HEYTHERE on March 20th, 2012
False. Adam and Eve had additional children besides Cain and Abel. However, for the population to increase, there was some inter-family marriages, but at that time the gene pool was a whole lot purer. That has not been the case for some time now.
Comments
- Please cite a source regarding the comment about genetics.
  
  Report
  
  by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 20th, 2012
- Since Adam and Eve were created in a state of high perfection, with the full complement of genetic material, this would have allowed substantial variety to arise quickly among human beings, who were free from inherited defects because of a pure gene pool. [NB God originally created Adam and Eve immortal.] Thus it would have taken a long time for the gene pool within mankind to become contaminated enough to prohibit intermarriage between close relatives. That's based on scientific observation.
  
  Report
  
  by HEYTHERE on March 20th, 2012
- An interesting hypothesis. Do other mammals such as dogs, house cats, and elephants also have "impure" genetics.
  
  You mentioned quick changes in genetics. Actually, the estimate is 200k years for homo sapiens sapiens to evolve from homo sapiens neanderthalensis.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens
  
  Report
  
  by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 20th, 2012
- I don't understand the claim here: "False. Adam and Eve had additional children...". So what? It's still incest, no matter how many children they had.
  
  As for the purity of the gene pool, this sounds like something you made up as a personal opinion. There's absolutely not a shred of evidence that this is true, since there isn't a shred of evidence that Adam and Eve even existed.
  
  Report
  
  by HasntBeen on March 20th, 2012
- The children were offspring from Adam and Eve. Procreation between Adam and Eve is not incest.
  
  Man was not created out of some lower form of life (ape, chimpanzee, or hominid) as some theistic evolutionists claim. He was made, or fashioned, by the very hand of God out of 'aphar - inanimate dust, dirt, or clay.
  
  Report
  
  by HEYTHERE on March 21st, 2012
- So you say. All available evidence says that is wrong.
  
  Adam and Eve were not incest. The sex between their children to produce more generations was absolutely incest, there are no other possibilities in the Biblical account. Either the kids slept with each other, or they slept with their parents. Incest.
  
  In any case, it hardly matters -- the whole Garden of Eden story is a myth. What matters if mythical children had sex with their siblings? Doesn't matter -- but, you said it wasn't incest, which is obviously incorrect.
  
  Report
  
  by HasntBeen on March 21st, 2012
- I only said the children of Adam and Eve was not the result of incest. But, I was already in agreement that intermarriage of blood relatives had to occur to continue the species at that point.
  
  Report
  
  by HEYTHERE on March 22nd, 2012
- You have either redefined the word incest, or you do not take bible literally.
  
  Report
  
  by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 23rd, 2012
- No, it's just you don't take intermarriage as incest.
  
  Report
  
  by HEYTHERE on March 23rd, 2012
- Siblings having sex is incest. You have proved my point quite nicely. You have redefined incest.
  
  Report
  
  by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 23rd, 2012
- I don't think you can claim that siblings marrying each other is somehow not incest. There are laws on the books which prevent exactly that, and the conventional definition of incest does not distinguish whether or not the parties are married. In addition, there is no record of any marriages taking place among that set, so claiming that they were married has no support. Adam and Eve weren't even married, for that matter.
  
  In they myth, that is. To speak of mythical people being either single or married is a bit of a waste of breath, I suppose.
  
  Report
  
  by HasntBeen on March 23rd, 2012
- Are you both serious? I have already acknowleged that intermarriage constitutes incest. My previous comment was only directed to Ergo who didn't realize that intermarriage and incest were synonymous. I do appreciate your perspective.
  
  Report
  
  by HEYTHERE on March 23rd, 2012
- Huh? Intermarriage and incest are not synonymous: intermarriage between family members is not the same as sex between family members.
  
  In any case, there was no evidence that marriage was involved, so your use of the word seems a bit aimed at whitewashing the situation. These siblings had sex with each other or their parents. Assuming they existed, which is a lot to assume.
  
  Report
  
  by HasntBeen on March 23rd, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
13 comments | Post one | Permalink
by ☻Heart hacker☻ has Bieber fever on March 20th, 2012
Debatable
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Pheasant on March 20th, 2012
Possibly, or more were created than just Adam and Eve. Incest had been mentioned before, though. Lot's daughter's got him drunk, he passed out out, and they the had sex with him (each on different nights) and had his children (Moab and Ben-ammi) to preserve offspring from their father.

Genesis 19, 30-38
Comments
- The history is different than the Law of the Jews.
  
  Report
  
  by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 20th, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by TheFreckle on March 20th, 2012
incest is a sin by Christianity, and a sin must be recognized. In example, the result of our sinful ways was the realization that nudity is something to be ashamed of...therefore, your statement is FALSE
Comments
- Nudity is acceptable. Sexuality is a gray area.
  
  Report
  
  by ErgoStep - Millionaire Websites on March 20th, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by JDBMonkey on March 20th, 2012
Ummmm Derr...... look at the pictures, oh the colors.......
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Antipas on May 6th, 2011
Cain was the first child of Adam and Eve recorded in Scripture (Gen 4:1). He and his brothers Abel (Gen 4:2) and Seth (Gen 4:25) were part of the first generation of children ever born on this earth. Even though these three males were specifically mentioned, Adam and Eve had other children.

Genesis 5:4 " Then the days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years, and he had other sons and daughters."

If we now work totally from Scripture, without any personal prejudices or any other extrabiblical ideas, then back at the beginning, when there was only the first generation, brothers would have had to marry sisters or there wouldn't have been any more generations. I'll add here that we are not told "when" Cain married or many of the details of other marriages and children, but we can say for certain that Cains wife was either his sister or a close relative.

Many people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother sister marriage. Some say you can't marry your relation. Actually if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human. A wife is related to her husband before they are married because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve----all are of one blood. The law forbidding "close" relatives marrying was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20). Provided marriage was one man for one woman for life (based on Genesis 1-2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally (before the time of Moses) when close relatives, even brothers and sisters, married each other.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Gone_Hunting ! on May 2nd, 2011
She was a mail order bride !
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by r2802 on July 23rd, 2010
I believe that there were already other apelike humans on Earth that evolved naturally and that the "Adam and Eve" of the Bible were injected into the gene pool to give a boost to the apelike humans. We all believe that there were only one Adam, and one Eve. It is my believe that there were several couples planted on Earth at several locations where these apelike humans were, to give the new super humans a better chance of surviving. Cane and Abel went to the other villages to look for wives" according to the Bible, what other villages? My believe that these other villages were homes of the apelike humans and Cane and Abel mixed with these humans. Of course, I could be wrong.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by The Kat Attack on April 28th, 2009
they had more than two children. but incest did occur ^_^
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by SmashTheState on February 17th, 2009
In Genesis 6:1-4, the Bible states that humans reproduced with "Nephilim," which are never actually described, however it is made clear that the Nephilim are not human (and that the descendants of the human/Nephilim matings were greater than human also -- for example, Goliath).

Whether one takes a "Chariot of the Gods" view that the Nephilim were aliens who lived among humanity and the Genesis story an allegory for this, or a more orthodox view that the Nephilim were demons or angels of some sort (the books of Enoch and Jubilee make it quite clear that the Nephilim are in fact fallen angels), it remains that Adam and Eve and their children would not have been the only sentient creatures on the Earth. It doesn't require incest, then, for humanity to propagate itself.

Of course as an atheist, the answer I prefer is that Genesis was written by a bunch of Bronze Age barbarians sitting around a campfire, and they were more interested in picking at their lice and finding things moving slowly enough to catch and eat than spending their time closing plot-holes in their fairy tales.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Friartuck on February 17th, 2009
They shagged their sisters (and possibly their mum too). That's pretty-much it.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Mosexy on February 8th, 2009
Apparently, there were more who God created after Adam and Eve, but they are not mentioned directly, only referenced as ancestors of those who appear later in the Bible.

But of course, the entire story is really a vision. It's accuracy lies in the metaphor, not the literal text.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by jin jang on February 8th, 2009
If it was the case that Adam and Ever were the only two on earth at the time,and were unmarried.They had Cain and Abel.Thus since there was only one woman Eve would be the only one that could procreate with Cain and Abel.There is no mention of any other women at that time thus they would have to have slept with Eve to have another generation of offspring.
Comments
- Adam & Eve had sons and daughters and being perfect, they were able to marry their sisters .
  
  Report
  
  by seahorse on February 11th, 2009
- I have not read of any daughters,and that there was only 2 sons.
  
  Report
  
  by jin jang on February 11th, 2009
- Genesis 5 :1This is the book of Adam’s history. In the day of God’s creating Adam he made him in the likeness of God. 2 Male and female he created them. After that he blessed them and called their name Man in the day of their being created.
  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.
  
  Report
  
  by seahorse on February 11th, 2009
- Genesis 5:3-4
  3 ¶ And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own alikeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
  4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
  
  Report
  
  by edndori on February 11th, 2009
- If that be the case,and it is very unclear in the translation,the sons and daughters had to have slept together to have children.
  
  Report
  
  by jin jang on February 11th, 2009
- To us that might seem to be unclear.
  To them, with no other choice, it must have been too obvious to bother writing down.
  Rather like putting in your personal journal "I was born with five fingers on each hand".
  
  Report
  
  by edndori on February 11th, 2009
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
6 comments | Post one | Permalink
by VoteForLynn on February 8th, 2009
We can't be sure. The Bible only states that Adam and Eve were created; it doesn't specify that they were the first and we know they weren't the only (Nod).
Comments
- Doesn't follow. No others are mentioned as being created.
  We do know where one of the inhabitants of Nod (Cain himself) came from. Nothing in the Bible requires any other source for the rest of the inhabitants of that land.
  
  Report
  
  by edndori on February 11th, 2009
- Mixing these two chapters is not teaching the word of God based on what is written because this is two distinctive acts of God and when you do not teach them as so people lose there identity. Than you start to ask questions like how can all these Races/Nationalities come from two people on the face? Or how did Cain take a wife an where did she come from? Than these so claimed teachers of the word that claim to know the word will tell you Adam had daughters and Cain married Adams daughters this is another lie being taught to us out of ignorance. Adam did not have daughters until 800 years after Seth than he had son and daughters.
  
  Lets break this scripture down as it written in the context of which it is written let look at the Creation first.
  
  Genesis 1:27 So God created (man) in his own image, in the image of God created he him; MALE and FEMALE created he them.
  
  They did not say just two people here but God did say them which means two or more but God did not have to tell us this that is all we have to do is look around at all the Races/Nationality that we have over the face of the earth not including the Jewish race that is why Genesis 1:27 is speaking on the Creation of the Gentile Races. (the definition of Gentile means all other races other than the Jewish race)
  
  The word Create means to take "nothing" and make something.
  
  God Created (man) man is the subject here! Now who is this man? This is the (spirit man/our spirit man) why do we know this because it says in his own image, in the image of God. we know that flesh man is NOT in the image of God but our SPIRIT man is we all have a spirit man that lives in us until this flesh body dies than the spirit goes back to the Father! God is spirit this man spoken of here is in Gods image (spirit man). Than it says created he him! He has to go back to the subject which is man (spirit man) he/him is telling you the spirit man is a male/man. God did not create female spirits when we were with the Father why? Because He (God) did not have any reason to create them than, all the angles/messengers in the Bible was alway a man (and a young man) never a woman until Genesis 1:27 God needed a way to transport his children (souls) down to earth this is when God created female (a male/man with a womb the word male/man/men is representing the male spirit man that is also in the female body). So God took the (spirit man) put him into male and female bodies So in all actuality the woman: is a male with a womb to be able to reproduce after her and her mates kind to bring forth children of there own race kind after there own seed.
  1 Corinthians 15:38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed (sperm)his own body. (kind after kind, seed after seed)
  
  At this very moment God Created all the Races/Nations/Nationalities the "Gentile Races" (the word Gentile meaning all other races other than the Jews)these are the Jews that will be FORMED by God in Genesis 2:7 and all that bloodline from umbilical cord to umbilical cord. God used the words male and female instead of man and woman; God was showing us that He was focusing on their reproduction system that this is why he was creating them to replenish (replenish the earth not plenish this means to put back what was proof of an age before this earth age was) the earth. their job was going to be strictly to reproduce after there kind two of each race 2 white, 2 blacks, 2 Chinese 2 Germans 2 French etc,etc.
  
  Report
  
  by faith2727 on May 12th, 2012
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Thinker on December 13th, 2008
I heard several years ago some DNA people traced about a hundred widly seperated people from around the world. They found all traced back to a single woman about 6000 years ago.

Could this woman possibly be Eve? It is hard to say. but it does roughly coincide with the Creation Theories that the earth we have today was "re-created" with what is known as the "Gap theory".

If you wish to take the Adam and Eve story from the Bible then yes, we are all distant results of incest. There is much to be said on this theory, but incest even today does not always result in birth defects especially in the first generation. Defects of close incest start showing up in the third and fourth generations relative few show up in first or second generations. Also the blood was more pure with Adam and Eve and their imediate children
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by iwnit on December 13th, 2008
1) "Shortly after their expulsion, Eve brought forth her first-born child, and thereafter their second — Cain and Abel, respectively.

After Cain killed Abel, and was cursed to wander, Adam and Eve conceived a third child named Seth, who, with Cain, gave rise to the two family lines of the Generations of Adam.

According to the Bible, Adam finally died at the age of 930 years, the traditional Jewish view being that he and Eve are currently buried in the Cave of Machpelah, in Hebron."
Source and further information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_and_Eve

2) "The Life of Adam and Eve, also known, in its Greek version, as the Apocalypse of Moses, is a Jewish pseudepigraphical group of writings. It recounts the lives of Adam and Eve from after their expulsion from the Garden of Eden to their deaths. It provides more detail about the Fall of Man, including Eve's version of the story. Satan explains that he rebelled when God commanded him to worship Adam. After Adam dies, he and all his descendants are promised a resurrection."
According to this text:
"Adam begets 30 other sons and 30 daughters."
Source and further information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_of_Adam_and_Eve

3) I found an interesting explanation here:
"Where did Cain get his wife?
(Gen. 4:17) - "Then Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden. 17And Cain had relations with his wife and she conceived, and gave birth to Enoch; and he built a city, and called the name of the city Enoch, after the name of his son," (NASB).
We see in the Bible in Genesis 3 where Adam and Eve were cursed and sent out of the Garden of Eden. In Genesis 4, Cain kills Abel. In Genesis 4:17 above we see that Cain had relations with his wife. Where did he get his wife? The answer is simple. Cain married one of his sisters.
Genesis 5:4 says, "Then the days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years, and he had other sons and daughters." We see that Adam and Eve had many sons and daughters. The genetic lineage of Adam and Eve was perfect so marrying a sister wasn't going to cause birth defects. It wasn't until much later, during the time of Moses, that incest was forbidden as the genetic pool became less and less able to stand interbreeding. "‘No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD," (Lev. 18:6)."
Source and further information:
http://www.carm.org/diff/Gen4_17.htm

4) A similar situation happens after the Deluge.
In the Ark were Noah, his wife, their three sons and their respective wifes (and some animals...).
This means that Noah's grandchildren could only marry their cousins (or aunt/uncle).

Remember also that Eve was made of one of Adam's ribs. So it was some kind of clone... Sex with your clone is considered incest...

5) "Mitochondrial Eve (mt-mrca) is the name given by researchers to the woman who is defined as the matrilineal most recent common ancestor (MRCA) for all currently living humans. Passed down from mother to offspring, her mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is now found in all living humans: every mtDNA in every living person is derived from hers. Mitochondrial Eve is the female counterpart of Y-chromosomal Adam, the patrilineal most recent common ancestor, although they lived at different times.
She is believed to have lived about 140,000 years ago in what is now Ethiopia, Kenya or Tanzania.[citation needed] The time she lived is calculated based on the molecular clock technique of correlating elapsed time with observed genetic drift.
Mitochondrial Eve is the MRCA of all humans via the mitochondrial DNA pathway, not the unqualified MRCA of all humanity. All living humans can trace their ancestry back to the MRCA via at least one of their parents, but Mitochondrial Eve is defined via the maternal line. Therefore, she necessarily lived at least as long, though likely much longer, ago than the MRCA of all humanity.

The existence of Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam does not imply the existence of population bottlenecks or a first couple. They each may have lived within a large human population at a different time."
Source and further information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

Further information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosomal_Adam
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Anonymous on April 7th, 2008
Why can't people use the search feature before asking a question for the umpteenth time?
Comments
- Oooooo... looks like the truth hurts!
  
  Report
  
  by Anonymous on April 8th, 2008
- i asked this question 2 years before that one.. whats your issue?
  
  Report
  
  by keetypie1 on August 26th, 2008
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink