Did Adam and eve's children sexually procreate through incest?

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Another question is if Adam and Eve were the first 2 humans and all the rest come from them then aren't we all committing incest? We all have to be related. This is strange!!:doh:


Num_36:11 For Mahlah, Tirzah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married unto their father's brothers' sons:

That's why we're all brothers under the skin!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RuthD
Upvote 0

RuthD

blah blah blah
Site Supporter
Jul 2, 2006
90,795
20,530
Earth
✟191,472.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Num_36:11 For Mahlah, Tirzah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married unto their father's brothers' sons:

That's why we're all brothers under the skin!!
I guess it's not so bad the way you put it. lol. :)
 
Upvote 0

geetrue

Veteran
Site Supporter
Dec 16, 2006
2,375
451
Beach House
Visit site
✟73,776.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
Who were these other peoples that Cain was afraid of after he got booted out of the Garden of Eden?
Genesis 4: 13-17 NCV
Then Cain said to the LORD, “This punishment is more than I can stand! Today you have forced me to stop working the ground, and now I must hide from you. I must wander around on the earth, and anyone who meets me can kill me.”
The LORD said to Cain, “No! If anyone kills you, I will punish that person seven times more.” Then the LORD put a mark on Cain warning anyone who met him not to kill him.


Cain’s Family

So Cain went away from the LORD and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden. He had sexual relations with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fat wee robin
Upvote 0

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi geetrue,

Just as Steve has pointed out, all we can do is speculate. We are given some facts. Some events that we are told and some facts we are given. However, all of the questions that we have that arise from those facts and events are pure speculation. We have no witnesses from whom we can seek additional information.

What are the facts?

Well, the Scriptures tell us that God created the heavens and the earth in six days. Up until the 3rd day the earth would have been uninhabitable by human beings. There was no food. We are told that Adam and Eve were formed by God and not born through natural birth. We are told that Adam and Eve had two sons named Cain and Abel. We are also told that Eve is the mother of all the living. We are told that at some time Cain killed Abel. We are told that the Lord put Cain out of Eden and that when the Lord spoke to Cain about this, Cain was concerned that anyone could kill him. Finally, we are told that Eve had another son named Seth.

That's about it as far as facts and events that are relevant to this particular issue. Now, if we want to question the account beyond these facts, then we must speculate.

Because Adam and Eve were formed by God and had no earthly parents to care for them, they were likely created as full grown adults. This means that from day one of their life they could procreate and they were commanded to do that.

So, let's, just for fun, run the possible numbers. Today, family size is often limited because of the cost of caring for children. However, in the days of the beginning, food was free and there were no laws that children had to go to school. There would really have been very little reason that Adam and Eve didn't have children fairly regularly and often. But we can only speculate on these things.

Let's say that they had two or three children every 4-5 years. That's about what the average family has today when they do begin having children. Most siblings today are only 4-5 years apart in age. Now, yes, I understand that's not true of every family so please don't anyone respond with 'my brother and I are 20 years apart'. I'm strictly running averages here.

Let's also consider that menopause would not have set in for Eve for many, many years beyond the age women begin to have it now. After all, if Adam and Eve were both created at pretty much the same time, then Eve was 130 years old when she had Seth also. So, how many children could Adam and Eve had birthed in 130 years?

Now, let's add the next generation. Adam and Eve had children who in 15-25 years would have likely been having children. So, by the 40th year of the beginning, Adam and Eve could have had 24 children of their own and the second first generation of children could have been beginning to have their own children. Some of the third generation would have been old enough to be having children also by the 40th year of the creation. The real numbers can possibly be way more than I'm accounting for here.

If we use the same averages of 3-4 children every 4-5 years for the next generation, then by the end of 80 years we would be working into the third generation having children and even the 4th generation. It is possible that if each of Adam and Eve's first male children chose a sister for a wife that there might be at least 8 couples and possibly even 12 if the males and females were evenly born to them. At this point of 80 years from the creation it is possible that there would have been 200 new births added to the 26 older children. And there could likely have been more even more. I have only taken a snapshot at 40 and 80 years, but children were still being born to all the people on the earth at that time. By 120 years there could well have been over 1,000 people living on the earth from the first parents, Adam and Eve. There may have actually been several thousand people living upon the earth.

Now, the second question we need to answer, again through speculation, is how old were Cain and Abel when this event occurred? We know that Eve likely had Seth shortly after Abel was killed because she credited Seth as being a replacement for Abel. Adam was 130 years old when Seth was born to them.

So, if Cain killed Abel, say, within 5 years of Seth's birth, then the creation would have been at least 125 years old and there could likely have been more than 1,000 people upon the earth. So, who would Cain have been afraid of killing him? Possibly over 1,000 people. Further, because all of these 1,000+ people were all fairly direct descendants of Adam and Eve and therefore, close cousins, brothers and sisters of the deceased, that might help explain why he was fearful that they might desire to kill him.

Let's face it, even today the people who are most angry enough to want to kill a murderer are the families of the victim.

Yes, it's all speculative, but it's also all possible as an explanation to your question. By the way, by this fourth generation men could well have been choosing wives from families that are not later a part of God's command that a man should not have sexual relations with the family relations that He mentions. Men could well have picked the daughters of fairly distant cousins.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Luke17:37
Upvote 0

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi again geetrue,

Then we are told that Cain began to build a city. After another 120 years in which Cain would have been some 250-300 years old, he and his wife could have fairly well replicated what Adam and Eve had done and he would have a city of people who were his relatives. In those days, a city of over 1,000 people would have been a good sized city of people.

Then consider that all of the other descendants of Adam and Eve were likely still having children, by the year that Cain was 250-300 years old there could likely have been 10,000 people that Cain would be afraid of might want to kill him. Cain would have witnessed the explosive growth of people from his parents and his fear of someone wanting to kill him may well have taken these future generations into account.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
We are told that the Lord put Cain out of Eden


Adam and Eve were kicked out of Eden---and a guard placed to prevent anyone entering so no one could eat of the tree of Life.---Cain was banished from where he was living. Also I believe your numbers are a little on the low side----women today have been known to give birth to 24 children---I personally met one who had 22. And that from about 15--45 at most. Some women have even had them less than a year apart!! My husband being one of them with a brother less than a year younger than he. His mother got pregnant about 1 month after he was born!!---Now, Eve and her daughters were in above average health---easily spit out 1 a year---for several hundred years!! Rabbits, they were!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWood
Upvote 0

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi mmksparbud,

Right! The numbers could be low. After all, it's all speculation as to how exactly mankind began to build through procreation. But, there's really no reason to deny the facts we are given concerning other people soon appearing in the narrative based on the first fact that Adam and Eve were the first two people living on the newly created earth and that Eve, we are told, is the mother of all the living.

Even if we do allow for some evolutionary process to explain mankind, there would likely have been familial sexual relations. After all, animals have familial sexual relations often. A litter of puppies, if they are kept together will ultimately have sexual relations among the litter. Cows and horses have relations with parents, siblings and whoever happens to be around when heat comes on. If evolution explains the cause of mankind, then we are nothing more than animals and forbidden sexual relations are nothing more than a moral code that would have been made up after the first humans evolved.

If, on the other hand, we allow that other people somehow lived upon the earth because God made other people before He created Adam and Eve, then we do have to allow that the six days were not really six days, but rather six ages. We also have to allow that Eve was not really the mother of all the living. We also have to allow that sin was not passed down to future man through Adam. There would be many, many people who were not relatives of Adam or Eve. We would also have to believe that the world of people before Adam were all good and perfect people without sin or rebellion to God. That the world was a perfect place just as God had created it to be until Adam came along and the account of Satan's interaction with Adam and Eve brought sin into the world.

So, there are a lot of other questions and problems that arise if we deny the true historicity of the Genesis account. I'm not saying that they can't also be answered through speculation, but they can't be answered if the Scriptures are historically accurate.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted
 
Upvote 0

fat wee robin

Newbie
Jan 12, 2015
2,494
842
✟47,420.00
Country
France
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
There are multiple problems with the logic being advocated in this thread that Adam and Eve's children were required to propagate through incest, and that was somehow 'okay' with God.

There is an assumption that there were no other people created by God besides Adam and Eve. The Bible does not state that.

There is an assumption that Adam and Eve's children therefore married each other. The Bible does not state that. You could just as easily assume that Adam fathered children by his daughters and Eve had children by her sons. After all, incest was allowed right? And so was polygamy.

There is an assumption that incest was allowed by God because the genetic code was pure for a period of time after the fall. The Bible does not state that.

There is an assumption that the only reason incest was banned by God is because the genetic code began to deteriorate. The Bible does not state that. This one is especially problematic because it means that incest is not in itself a moral evil but the ban against it is merely a matter of practicality (like don't eat shellfish, it's bad for your health). The other problem with that view is that God doesn't specifically ban a lot of practices until the Mosaic law -- adultery for example. He never specifically bans polygamy at all. Yet we know that God's view of these things does not change, and they are morally evil.

So yes, Abraham married his half sister. That doesn't mean that was okay with God anymore than Jacob having 4 wives was okay with God. God doesn't condemn that action either but that doesn't mean polygamy was okay then and it's not now, for any reason. Neither was incest okay then and it is not now. And God didn't create a situation where incest was 'necessary' if it is a moral evil.

What God does do is gradually bring people along and reveal more and more of Himself to them. That's why in the OT an "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth" was commanded (it was progression from the current state of people) but Christ takes that a step farther along the moral path. That doesn't mean God was ever okay with people demanding an eye for an eye. He was never okay with them demanding more than an eye for an eye. It means He knew they had to take one step before they could take the next one.

By assuming things that are not stated in Scripture, the outcome is to either redefine a moral evil (incest) into an amoral act that is banned simply as a matter of practicality, OR to believe God created a situation where an immoral act was a necessity. Both of those are wrong. Incest has and always will be a grave evil. St. Paul refers to it as "sexual immorality" for a reason. And God cannot create a situation where committing an immoral act is necessary to fulfill another of His commands -- 'be fruitful and multiple'.
I was about to state that in and off itself incest is immoral, and to say that God
was fine with it until it was no longer pragmatic because of genetic deterioration, and so then banned it, makes all His laws subject to 'change ' ; then you said it all ,but much better than I could have .
What it does show up is the lack of understanding of a truly Holy God, from those who see Him as a form of irrational petty tyrant , who makes up rules according to His mood .
 
Upvote 0

fat wee robin

Newbie
Jan 12, 2015
2,494
842
✟47,420.00
Country
France
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Adam and Eve were not necessarily the first or only people on earth. An excellent examination of this viewpoint is John Walton's book "The Lost World of Adam and Eve".

John
NZ
So maybe those blue eyed people who apparently emerged just around the 6000 years A .D. near the Black Sea were God's newest children , who went on to
create the 'new worlds ' . Maybe those are the bibles Adam and Eve .
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi fat wee robin,

I don't know why you would have liked my post. It is in direct contradiction to your last post. For those who can't seem to believe that God changes His commands based on a changing purpose, maybe you can explain this:

The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands.

Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

“Say to the Israelites: ‘Of all the animals that live on land, these are the ones you may eat:

You may eat any animal that has a divided hoof and that chews the cud.
“ ‘There are some that only chew the cud or only have a divided hoof, but you must not eat them. The camel, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is ceremonially unclean for you.

The hyrax, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you.

The rabbit, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you.

And the pig, though it has a divided hoof, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you.

You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you.

“ ‘Of all the creatures living in the water of the seas and the streams you may eat any that have fins and scales.

But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales—whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water—you are to regard as unclean.
So, in one place God says that we can eat everything that moves and in another He says that we can't eat everything that moves, but only certain animals.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted
 
Upvote 0

pat34lee

Messianic
Sep 13, 2011
11,293
2,637
59
Florida, USA
✟89,330.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
I was about to state that in and off itself incest is immoral, and to say that God was fine with it until it was no longer pragmatic because of genetic deterioration, and so then banned it, makes all His laws subject to 'change '

Not really. We are not the same as pre-flood
people in any way. Not only did they live longer,
they were smarter, healthier and stronger. They
didn't need the rules we need now, as grown-ups
don't need the same rules as children.
 
Upvote 0

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,002
82
New Zealand
✟74,521.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
So maybe those blue eyed people who apparently emerged just around the 6000 years A .D. near the Black Sea were God's newest children , who went on to
create the 'new worlds ' . Maybe those are the bibles Adam and Eve .

Very likely the Genesis story is about our history in our present human form. There may well be other histories we are never told about. There are some hints in Scripture that could be so. It removes the massive issues related to the age of the earth and archaeology.

John
NZ
 
  • Like
Reactions: fat wee robin
Upvote 0

Far Side Of the Moon

" The moon is high& the stars are aligned" :)
Mar 11, 2016
3,944
2,909
Georgia
✟30,290.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
If you are a wooden headed biblical literalist, then yes; it was incest.

Next come the creative arguments to get God off the hook for allowing something (incest) He made necessary in the first place.
Yah I hate when people try to get God ," off the hook"
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Lazarus Short

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2016
2,934
3,009
74
Independence, Missouri, USA
✟294,142.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
God had also permitted multiple wives---in the new testament, that was also done away with.

If so, then why do the design parameters for the office of Bishop include "husband of ONE wife"? If one husband + one wife was the norm for Christians in that time and place, it would not have been necessary to mention. I can find no ban anywhere in the Bible for having multiple wives, but I think it's just a bad idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWood
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
If so, then why do the design parameters for the office of Bishop include "husband of ONE wife"? If one husband + one wife was the norm for Christians in that time and place, it would not have been necessary to mention. I can find no ban anywhere in the Bible for having multiple wives, but I think it's just a bad idea.



The ideal, from the start, was one wife. God did not say do not have more than one, and did allow it, but not what He wanted. He made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve, and Cathy, and Sue.....
Gen_2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
He did say cleave unto his wife, not wives, and they would be one flesh---it's kind of hard to be one flesh with more than one wife---what's that, 1/2 flesh if 2?
He also did not want divorce, but He allowed it. But the NT did say for bishops, deacons and such to have only one wife. It does not say that everyone else had to have only one wife, but the heads of the church do come from laity and if you were going to have an opportunity to advance in the church, you could only have one wife so it ends up being, might as well have only one. There was a transition point there, for new Christians were coming in who had more than one and this way it was slower, but kinder to those who had multiples. If Abraham had not taken on Hagar, the middle east wouldn't be in such a mess today!! It's just messy and complicated and too many unhappy people in the process, too many who have been in it that when they come out of it voice their unhappiness about it. Though when in it, many say they are OK with it----at first.
 
Upvote 0

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Site Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,419
6,800
✟916,702.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Did Adam and eve's children have sex with each other in order to reproduce?


Maybe but they didn't have to in order to reproduce. They could have had sex with Adam and/or Eve, or any number of other people that existed in the world. Adam and Eve weren't the first two people despite popular belief.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWood
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Maybe but they didn't have to in order to reproduce. They could have had sex with Adam and/or Eve, or any number of other people that existed in the world. Adam and Eve weren't the first two people despite popular belief.


It is what the bible says and anything else is not biblical and purely speculation.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Site Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,419
6,800
✟916,702.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
It is what the bible says and anything else is not biblical and purely speculation.

No, the bible does not say that. It is that which is pure speculation.
 
Upvote 0