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

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

As Abraham once said, Incest is the Best.

 

[keltoi]

Also let us not forget that naughty angels inserted their genetic material in the human race through their Nephil children, who reproduced both before and after the Flood.

I have never been convinced of this.

 

[Vicomte13]

I have never been convinced of this.

It's one of those places in the text where one has to decide whether or not to be literalist, and where the canon you choose makes the biggest difference.

 

[Colter]

Did Adam and eve's children have sex with each other in order to reproduce?

No, Cain found a wife in Nod among the Nodites. Adam and Eve incarnate on a previously populated, fallen earth. The beast was already fallen, already evil. The fragments of the Genesis account used to make the creation narrative left clues of a much, much bigger story.

 

[Colter]

Ok, interesting story -- but what about those who believe the actual Bible?

Those who petrify the Bible are stunted in their spiritual and intellectual growth. Its like going to a doctor who uses a medical book from the first century. Proscribing blood letting for everything.

 

[Colter]

Yes.

In fact Eve is created from Adam's rib - she is a genetic twin to Adam.

The reason that did not create birth defects is that their DNA - their genome - had no errors in it at the start. So also their children had no defects - it took a few generations to get the mutations up to a level where family marriages were no longer viable.

You are digging yourself in deep! On one thread you claim man is 6,000 years old, here you talk DNA and "genome" which goes way, way back!

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Those who petrify the Bible are stunted in their spiritual and intellectual growth. Its like going to a doctor who uses a medical book from the first century. Proscribing blood letting for everything.

And, those who a have changeable scripture end up with a God made in the image of self.

 

[Colter]

And, those who a have changeable scripture end up with a God made in the image of self.

I disagree with that, we were supposed to be growing in Gods image to begin with, not the image of men's thinking in the dim and distant past. It was the holy men who called their writings Gods writings, hence creating God in their own image. This leaves believers in the awful predicament of defending the standards of the holy men of thousands of years ago.

 

[Nym]

Jesus said we can't add to ourselves by thought, is this not what all of this is? in the context of self.

I guess you could say what does this have to do with the thread, but what would be the recourse if you bring it down to a single thought.

 

[Blade]

Well ..if you know anything about this ..takes some time for things to start to go bad.. lack of a better way to say it. There was no law then...even with Lot and his two daughters. Yet what is now is not the way it was then. God still talked to them and they to Him..where is your bother? He just killed him yet GOD still was talking to him. So sex.. the way we look at it and have for thousands of years is NOT Like it was then. There was so much of GOD around.. not there is sin and all the wicked thoughts that go with it. So your looking back and yet .. through tainted glass that you cant even see through.

 

[Colter]

Darwin married his cousin. Just that I would throw that in there.

 

[AFrazier]

Darwin married his cousin. Just that I would throw that in there.

By Darwin's reckoning, he married a monkey. Is he not the one who commented that he'd be a monkey's uncle?

But Darwin also wrote under the pseudonym Stultis the Fool, because he recognized the folly of his specific pursuit.

 

[keltoi]

By Darwin's reckoning, he married a monkey. Is he not the one who commented that he'd be a monkey's uncle?

But Darwin also wrote under the pseudonym Stultis the Fool, because he recognized the folly of his specific pursuit.

More like he recognised other scientist thought his experiments were folly.

 

[Luke17:37]

If you look up Adam in Gesenius, it is clear that the name is derived from the word for 'red' or 'blood' (Heb. dam).

Actually Adam's name is derived from athamah (ground)... from which he was formed.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Actually Adam's name is derived from athamah (ground)... from which he was formed.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=kjv&strongs=h119

http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/nas/adam-3.html

 

[Luke17:37]

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=kjv&strongs=h119

http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/nas/adam-3.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adamah

I'm not making stuff up. I remember it from Biblical Hebrew class when we translated pieces of Genesis. I feel like you just want to prove me wrong but I wonder if you'll just open your eyes a little wider. Maybe ground (athamah or adamah) is derived from Adam, but ground and Adam are obviously related in the account. Someone else said it, too, I noticed.

 

[SkyWriting]

We're not talking about multiple wives. We are talking about incest. You are saying that it was OK with God. Does His morality change?

Change to what? Where?

 

[SkyWriting]

Then you have to figure out why incest was OK at one time but not later on. Of course the Bible doesn't say why, so you get to make it up.

So the Bible doesn't describe mutations to DNA causing problems?
That's a pretty high expectation.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

I see the topic has changed since its start but why would anyone think their kids did not have sex? Babies aren't magically delivered by storks. Even in the bible it talks about going forth and spreading. Now is it incest? Well by our current terms yes. But I don't think God had anything against it at the time. It was the only way to populate the planet. Though I am not sure at what point Hes like "Ok, there are enough of you now, stop the incest!".

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

Gods morality doesn't change but the rules do. Depending on the dispensation you are under. If under the law then the law if under grace as we are under, then under grace.