Seriously, no offence, I believe in the bible. But think about it, if Adam and Eve we're the first man and woman then who did there children marry to make more people??
2007-06-22 09:34:59 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Adam and Eve were not the first people.
Rather than make this a really long answer, I'd rather invite you to read an article I published a couple years ago. It explains the misconceptions about the first humans and offers an answer to your question.
Here's the link http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=90280440&blogID=142791154
2007-06-26 05:52:10 · answer #1 · answered by Dakota 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Adam Lived for like 900 years- so Adam and Eve probably had a lot of children. Cain and Abel are the only ones mentioned by name because their story was a vital one to learn. It sounds strange, but siblings must have married for a while.
The thing about Eve being with her sons is just stupid. The bible says that they had sons and daughters, Women just aren't mentioned much in the bible that doesn't mean they did not exsist.
2007-06-22 09:56:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The boys married the sisters, according to some. Others say that since no girls were actually mentioned in the Bible, the boys married their mother, Eve. You also have to believe that Eve and Adam had enough children to populate Nod, the land where Cain found his wife.
2007-06-22 09:38:40 · answer #3 · answered by razzthedestroyer 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Simple answer is that brothers and sisters married.
Today, we call that incest, but think about it for a second. After hundreds of generations, many mutations in the gene pool exist, so you don't want to breed with a close relative, because the liklihood of passing on a genetic defect is too great.
But with Adam & Eve, there were created by the PERFECT hand of God. their children probably had very few genetic defects, if any at all.
2007-06-22 09:48:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
According to some, the sons committed incest with their sisters (after all, the Pharaohs did it so, at that time, they probably didn't think about it much)
there's a book of Enoch (?-I think it 's Enoch) in the Ethiopian Bible that says as much-I've also heard there were men & women in Nod...but I don't know very much about that
re: savage nation armydude's answer-in Genesis, there are two different versions of the creation in Ch 1 and Ch 2, if the word we translated as 'Adam' was really 'human' what exactly were existing before God made humans? It sounds to me that you are attemtpting to combine the first two chapters and, plenty of historians, both Christian and non, have attested to the fact that incest had to be involved. They have years of study and research and schooling on the subject-you can't really label them as 'morons' w/o it reflecting on your intelligence (or lack of)
2007-06-22 09:45:48 · answer #5 · answered by strpenta 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
seriously no offense taken and i've heard some really insane answers "the races were so pure back then they could inbreed" and others...
the fact is that Word of GOd clearly states there men and women created BEFORE Adam and Eve were created...archaeology proves this as well.
God said let Us/elohim make man in our/elohim image and he created them men and women and said go and be fruitful and multiply upon the face of the earth and REPLENISH THe eath....and this was the day and the Evening of THE SIXTH DAY....Then God rested on the SEVENTH Day.....THEN God saw he had no man to til the soil/messiah lineage...so he created HA ADAM.....
all you have to do is read it and ignore churches and their pathetic teaching....lest whom did Cain marry in the land of Nod if there weren't already people there? he married a woman from the sixth day creation of men and women or other races that lived in Nod....he didnt' marry a sister or some idiocy as others like to claim.
hope that helps.
yeah, there it is! the subsequent answers show the ignorance and prevalence of lies perpetrated by and believed by complete and utter morons.
2007-06-22 09:40:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
They reproduced asexually. Every now and then they would simply 'bud'.
But seriously, it is better to take this story to be symbolic, about humankind in general. Although we usually name the main character 'Adam' in English translations, "Adam" isn't a name in Hebrew, it is the word for human being. I wonder how the perception of Christians reading the book in English would be different if we had translated it more literally, so that the main character in Genesis 2-3 was called "Human".
2007-06-22 09:44:21 · answer #7 · answered by jamesfrankmcgrath 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
If you believe in the bible, the facts are obvious. Who really knows if the bible is real? It is faith if you believe in the bible. Or it makes people feel better to read things that can help them. Nobody has an autograph from anyone who can confirm things from a time where there was no data to rely on.
2007-06-22 10:11:04 · answer #8 · answered by kjrjekjrje 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
well in Gen. after Cain gets thrown away from his family the Bible says that he went with his wife. So honestly, one would say she was either his sister or, ther were more people made on this planet that were not mentioned.
2007-06-22 09:39:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Facts should not be offensive. The answer to your question, if that is, you believe in the teachings of the Bible, is INCEST.
2007-06-22 09:40:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋