May 07, 2008 04:39PM GMTMay 07, 2008 16:39:23
Question Religion - Other

Question Stats

18 answers
80 comments
raves +5  
Share This Question

God created Adam and Eve. They had 2 Sons and 7 daughters. Incest is wrong in the eyes of the Lord, right? Then were did the rest of mankind come from?...?

Add Image Add Video
resize
Loading Loading...
Top Comment
raves +2   by lilith_anna

Answered None of the above

You're forgetting Adam's first wife... You may have heard of her, her name was Lilith.

view thread
Sort By: Raves | Date 1 2 Next » Last » Comments
  • raves     [-] by thir1t3en

    Answered Undecided

    Another fine example of how inconsistent ''god's word'' is, huh...Seems to me that "He" is one hell of a double standard type of guy. I believe there is NO gray area when it comes to morality. Incest is incest and it is morally WRONG, whether it be for procreation to populate the earth or not. If he could create one set of human followers, then he could create many. Period. The bible is just ridiculous stories made up by someone to give man a sense of hope for eternal life.
  • raves     [-] by Dave Sawyer

    Answered Was before the laws of God were handed down to Moses

    The Bible says that Adam and Eve had three named sons: Cain, Abel, and Seth. Besides that, it says they had other sons and daughters. It doesn't say how many. There is nothing mentioned about incest until the laws of Moses, thousands of years later.
  • raves +1   [-] thir1t3en replied to Dave Sawyer
    so that makes it right because a law was not introduced until Moses' time? Does that make God wishy-washy? ( double standard in laymen's terms )
  • raves +1   [-] Dave Sawyer replied to thir1t3en
    No. The law about incest was introduced after genetic mutations caused problems for children of close-relation marriages. It shows that God is concerned for our welfare. Why should he make a law before there was a problem and one that would prohibit sexual relations for the whole human family?
  • raves +1   [-] thir1t3en replied to Dave Sawyer
    I am so not going to argue semantics. You are talking to a Free Will Baptist backsliding agnostic. lol!
  • raves +1   [-] Dave Sawyer replied to thir1t3en
    So what un-Biblical means of marriage had you in mind for Cain and his brethren and his grandchildren?
  • raves +1   [-] thir1t3en replied to Dave Sawyer
    *sigh* Let's say the bible is an actual book of history from that time period. Sex was not intended for pleasure, as we think of it in our times-no. It was solely for the purpose of procreation and to populate the earth. I agree there, IF I actually believed in the situation. As it has been pointed out, Cain and Abel chose women from another village to marry, thus proving that He, indeed, does have our welfare in mind and not negate his own laws. THAT is what I was referring to. We would be pretty stupid to believe that he would do such a thing.
    I am agnostic though, so these events are neither here nor there to me. To be brutally honest, does it really matter how in the hell we go there? The point is we are alive, right? So it is.
  • raves +1   [-] Dave Sawyer replied to thir1t3en
    Sorry. I misread your remark to mean you were the Free-will Baptist and I was the backsliding agnostic.

    But if the Bible is and actual book of history there were no other villages, just Adam, Eve, Cain and his sisters (until Seth was born), since Seth replaced Abel as the male heir.
  • raves +1   [-] thir1t3en replied to Dave Sawyer
    ( in heavy oriental accent ) heavy oriental accent You very big. You smarter than me. Have bigger balls.
    hehehe.
  • raves     [-] Dave Sawyer replied to thir1t3en
    Isn't that what they say in the movies before they throw you and your ten friends out the window?
  • raves +1   [-] thir1t3en replied to Dave Sawyer
    That WAS a compliment to you. Maybe you need to eat a little Fiber One before you go to Sunday School in the morning. Oh yea, and have a nice big cup of hot coffee!
  • raves     [-] by Storm

    Answered None of the above

    I asked this to my Father once, and he had a simple yet very good answer...

    The Bible says that Adam & Eve were the first people, yes, but it does not say that God stopped with them. Cane & Able also are said to have taken wives from the nearby village. So, they took wives other than their siblings. Therefore, no incest involved.
  • raves     [-] by Tantrum1

    Answered All of the above

    It is God..sorry somethings just happen but screwing your sister, daughter, or brother or son is wrong. Though Step-Daughters are cool.
  • raves     [-] by gmanj77

    Answered None of the above

    moderated...
  • raves +1   [-] by Mandi

    Answered Not quite sure

    but thats a good point but we aren't suppose to question him.
  • raves +1   [-] by altrene

    Answered None of the above

    Bible=fiction used to scare people into doing what the church wants them to.
  • raves +1   [-] TJ replied to altrene
    This was awhile ago I know, but (don't take me wrong I don't read the bible) I wouldn't call it that. It's just a book containing reasons to why the people do what they do, stories that tell abouthow they should live, and what they beeive to be punishment. I wouldn't really cal lit a horror book...
  • raves     [-] zef3rr3t replied to altrene
    yea you sure addressed the question
    if you dont have an answer GO AWAY!
    if you dont Believe than there is no point in clicking on the question.
  • raves   -1 [-] altrene replied to zef3rr3t
    You go away? I am discrediting the question. Stating that the whole Adam and Eve thing never happened. Evolution baby. Get over it.
  • raves     [-] Dave Sawyer replied to altrene
    OK, with evolution there must have been a lot of incest, huh?

    After all, one can only have productive sex with their own species, right?
  • raves +1   [-] altrene replied to Dave Sawyer
    Go read on what exactly evolution is. It doesn't happen over night.
  • raves     [-] Dave Sawyer replied to altrene
    From what I can tell, it never happened at all.
  • raves +1   [-] altrene replied to Dave Sawyer
    Try taking an anthropology class and educate yourself.
  • raves     [-] Dave Sawyer replied to altrene
    They don't offer any "proof" in an Anthropology class (I did take one in college), just opinions and theories.
  • raves +1   [-] altrene replied to Dave Sawyer
    Well, I believe the Bible to be a theory.

    Everything is a theory. We as humans know NOTHING. Not truly.

    So it is my personal choice to believe the theory of evolution over the theory of the Bible.
  • raves     [-] Dave Sawyer replied to altrene
    I can actually get to know God. I haven't met evolution yet, but I've heard rumors.
  • raves +1   [-] Don - K.M.R.I.A. replied to Dave Sawyer
    Really? How so? Because the last time I looked, God was a concept. Evolution is a scientific method, so of course you cannot "meet" it. You can't "meet" erosion, but it's still there.
  • raves     [-] Dave Sawyer replied to Don - K.M.R.I.A.
    I've seen erosion and even watched it happen. I've talked to God and He's talked to me. Evolution to me, doesn't exist.
  • raves +1   [-] Don - K.M.R.I.A. replied to Dave Sawyer
    To you. But that doesn't mean it isn't/hasn't happened. But if you want to "speak" to evolution, have a conversation with the lowly mudskipper and blind tetra. They are walking (swimming) proof.
  • raves     [-] Dave Sawyer replied to Don - K.M.R.I.A.
    I don't believe they can talk. How are they proof?
  • raves +1   [-] Don - K.M.R.I.A. replied to Dave Sawyer
    No, but their composition and history can "talk." The same way archeological sites do.
    It's a bit too involved to get into in a simple post, but if you look up the Blind Tetra, and the Mudskipper, you can see evolution at work.
  • raves     [-] Dave Sawyer replied to Don - K.M.R.I.A.