2006-08-02 21:35:39 · 19 answers · asked by Lal 1 in Social Science ➔ Anthropology
the commentaries say that each son was born with a twin sister who they married. although this sounds like incest, they had a divine duty to continue the human population if the world and since there was noone else there they did what they had to do.
does this satisfy your curiosity?
2006-08-02 21:41:54 · answer #1 · answered by prizzma 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because it's all a fairy story---just a creation myth.
Adam and Eve weren't real people; they are mythological people.
If you take the story literally, which aparently you do, then Eve would have been a clone of Adam (made directly from his cells---the rib). Which also wouldn't make sense, because a clone can only be the same biological sex as the parent. So IF you can wrap your brain around that, then imagine that Adam has sex with his daughter/wife, Eve, then yes, a viable offspring could be born. People have in incorrect idea that any time close relatives have sex, they wouldn't have a baby or the baby would be a total genetic freak. Generally speaking, inbreeding takes a few generations to "kick in". Anyway, if you take the Adam and Eve story literally, none of us would be here.
The creation myths of cultures and religions are not meant to be taken literally.
2006-08-04 01:41:53 · answer #2 · answered by P-nuts and Hair-dos 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They had wives. Adam and Eve are the earliest names in the geneology of the house of Adam. They weren't the first people to walk the earth - just the first recorded by this highly literate Hebrew culture. In the long centuries of exile, a pedigree on paper was of the utmost importance to this impoverished dynasty. These lists of names are still used by Jews and Christians to prove their pedigree, but the old geneolgy was never adopted by Islam. I hope this helps.
2006-08-02 23:39:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I always maintain that the story of Adam and Eve in the Bible are allegorical stories, referring to the "Atman" and "Jeevan", perching on a peepul tree wondering whether or not to eat the fruit, referring to worldly wisdom. Vedic pundits, in Hindu religion, vouch for a reference to this anecdote, in the Vedas. To trace the origin of man, from this allegory, will only lead to a conclusion, which can be easily repudiated by science.
2006-08-03 00:06:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Adam and Eve just another myth, put whatever name on them from any place or culture, every religion has to have them, it is religions job to translate the Alpha and Omega of their god. So Adam and Eve might of done it missionary or otherwise it doesn't matter. I wonder what Homo Erectus called their Adam and Eve, they probably didn't worry about it...
2006-08-03 08:07:50 · answer #5 · answered by spider 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I always assumed that Adam and Eve were having other children in the meantime. Which means brother on sister action.
There's a lot of incest in the Bible, when you think about it.
2006-08-02 21:39:37 · answer #6 · answered by answerator 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sons married daughters. Don't laugh, there's no reason not to. Genetic code would have been pure, so no problems. After 1400 years or so, however, then people were commanded not to marry their immediate relatives anymore.
2006-08-02 21:41:36 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Pass the Sister.
2006-08-03 03:15:43 · answer #8 · answered by Aan 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That was just a metaphor. My sex-education brother (he is a catholic decon) told us that the "7 days" in the bible is just a narrowing of the whole "evolutionary process" . I believe him all the way.
2006-08-02 21:50:26 · answer #9 · answered by john s 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
god's will... Plus Eve
2006-08-03 04:09:11 · answer #10 · answered by GuardianCy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋