English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-11-19 23:35:44 · 33 answers · asked by cookie 1 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

even if they had daugthers so that mean adam had sex with his children?

2007-11-19 23:42:17 · update #1

33 answers

:)

i know where you are leading with this...how ever, the two sons were Kane and Able. Those two are talked about because of the fight between them, Kane was jealous of Able for many reasons, the biggest one was the offerings, Kane would bring his fruits and Able would bring his live stock as God commanded. Able was blessed for obeying, and Kane in a jealous rage killed his brother Able.

Adam and Eve had many others, but back then the blood line was so pure, that incest was not a problem, now how ever, in this time and age, it is a problem, both religiously and non-religiously. i am talking about brother and sister marring each other, not mother and son or father and daughter.

Even in the time of Noah, only his family was spared, and then again, we all came from him and his offspring.

if you are trying to lead to Darwin, and the theory of us coming from monkeys...i just can´t see that happening, because if it did, then why is it not happening today? Why don´t we see more monkeys changing in to "human"?

2007-11-19 23:38:41 · answer #1 · answered by FarmerCec 7 · 4 4

Quite honestly, and I know I will be shot down to Hell with thumbs down, I always thought Adam and Eve were apes. The first pair that evolved into humans. As such they could have mated with other apes, with whom they were still connected. Or their off spring could.
I mean really, where is the mention of dinosaurs etc. in the Bible? None. Because they started the Bible long after basic evolution had occurred.
Are there any bones found of Adam's clan? None for sure. There have been bones found which scientists believe are those of the earliest human. Not necessarily Adam. Therefore it is logical to assume that Adam and Eve were primitive models of ancient humans. As such they would have greatly resembled apes.
Some might argue that they were created in God's image. But how can they argue that means they were hairless and looked more like modern humans rather than cave-men? God doesn't have a physical image. If they were created in His image, this would surely mean they were advanced enough to think about things not necessary for their survival or immediate comfort, and were more creative and resourceful than the other apes. Everyone knows apes use tools etc. anyway. And that they live in an Alpha male society and any males who challenge the Boss and lose, are exiled.
Taking a step back, maybe God was the original evolver; no. I won't go there. It isn't worth it!
Thousands of years later the Christian Church commissioned artists to portray Adam and Eve. What were they to do? Paint two mutant apes? Of course not!
Adam and Eve and maybe a couple of other mutants probably did exist; they evolved from the stock already there.
With more breeding with other highly developed relatives, the human gene won out and slowly made a difference.

2007-11-21 01:38:52 · answer #2 · answered by kiteeze 5 · 0 0

If Adam (as is written) gave the world two sons - that would mean that Eve was still the only woman. But the same text also says that Adam lived to be hundreds of years old, so it's clearly all bo****ks anyway

2007-11-19 23:41:36 · answer #3 · answered by mark 7 · 2 0

The answer is in Genesis 5:4. Adam had daughters also. We are consitioned into seeing this as incest and as highly illegal and immoral, but the reason behind this is that such relationships can result in inbreeding, which is only bad because both parents may have peculair forms of imperfection to pass on. Adam and Eve were originally perfect and would not have passed on any diseases evemn though Eve was to some degree a clone of Adam, and their children were closer to perfection than we are, so they also would not have had any disease to pass on. Any children they would have had, would have been pretty much ok, but the situation eventually changed to what we have today. While it was neither illegal nor immoral in those days, we are very much set against it today. In conclusion, the wives of the sons of Adam would have benn either their sisters or neices.

This web site can help you get to a further understanding of this matter as you can request further informatio and a free home Bible study.

2007-11-19 23:48:20 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

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.

2007-11-19 23:43:49 · answer #5 · answered by Emily 4 · 3 3

You bet!!!!!!!! Incest was perfectly legal without any restrictions until Moses set up some regulations to stop it! over 3,000 years after the Adam and Eve days

edit: To make a point LOT was having sex with his 2 young virgin daughters until he got both of them pregnant and God the Holy Ghost says that LOT WAS A RIGHTEOUS MAN all over the Bible!!!

2007-11-19 23:41:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

No, the Bible is incredibly sexist. The daughters were rarely, if ever mentioned.

It also says that Cain was worried about being killed by others and that he founded a city. Both of these are highly questionable as there would have been very few people

2007-11-19 23:40:06 · answer #7 · answered by Pirate AM™ 7 · 4 0

I know what U say:

We are come from a monkey! LOLOL!!11

Why don't we see monkey turn to human? HUH??

Or why don't we see a rock with a wings?

Silly athiest.

Just look in the Bibran and see all the names of Adam and Eve''s daughters. They were beutiful and the first daughters in all the world.

2007-11-20 00:02:04 · answer #8 · answered by Bajingo 6 · 0 1

According to the christian religion mankind is based on incest, be it parent / child or brother / sister.

According to science the Adam line was and still is only one of the three known and verifiable white genus.

2007-11-20 01:19:14 · answer #9 · answered by Terry M 5 · 0 0

You're right, adam and eve did have two sons, but they were only the first. They also had daughters and more sons.

2007-11-19 23:39:04 · answer #10 · answered by Unresolved to be Resolved 2 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers