It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Adam and Eve's many children?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Its said that Adam and Eve were the first humans to walk the earth. If Im wrong about that please correct me. What I want to know is,
did Adam and Eve really produce the first human baby, if they did, then how did their children get children? Did they have intercourse with their siblings? How could Adam and Eve, including their children, produce their own children at such a short period of time, how could two people be able to start a large human population of over 6 billion?




posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 10:49 AM
link   
basically sisters would have sex with their brothers and vice versa, maybe adam even fathered some of his daughters children...thats the only way the could reproduce. i dont think i need to even get in to the complications of genetic diseases passed on because of the incest. but hey, this is the logically explanation of how we began in christian terms.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   
To me Adam and Eve is a story made up by man to explain where they came from. 2 people are not a sufficient genepool to populate an entire planet. I am a believer in a higher power, but I just can't take everything in the bible seriously. It's a book written by men who were given visions that I'm sure they couldn't fully comprehend. And I don't think God wanted Cain & Able doing their mom.

I think odds are pretty good we don't have the whole story.

[edit on 6/28/2005 by yadboy]



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I'm a Christian so I've wondered about this to. It is kind of complicated, so, I will make it simple. When you inbreed, you will get mutations and other disfigured things. Christians believe that because Adam and Eve sinned (disobeyed God), they were no longer perfect. Before they were perfect and everything was perfect. After the "fall", or after Adam and Eve sinned, the whole universe was no longer perfect. This was because God wanted to punish Adam and Eve by showing them the result of their actions.

So, now Adam and Eve were not perfect. When they were perfect, their genetic code was perfect also. So if them and their kids inbred, no mutations would come up. It takes a few generations for mistakes to show up in the genetic DNA. Thats why we cannot imbreed now. To many generations have gone by and there is to many mistakes in our genes now to do this. Don't believe me? Chack the statistics. Genetic disorders are on the rise, as the result of the "fall." Adam and Eve, according to some people, had 27 daughters and 25 sisters. THEY inbred. I doubt the brothers and sisters did their parents.

Do you get it now? If you do not, please tell me. Any questions?

5aret

[edit on 28-6-2005 by 5aret]



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 11:24 AM
link   
I will provide a few viewpoints on this.

A summary of the atheist viewpoint:


from www.vexen.co.uk...
The story of Adam and Eve in Genesis is mythical. Even so it fails to present any valid morals, and instead proposes that a) it is acceptable to punish people for the sins of others (original sin) and b) that death is a suitable punishment for disobedience. Adam and Eve's sons must have slept with their own mother. It is an immoral story that we shouldn't suffer upon children until they are old enough to understand it as a religious myth. God is shown to be a bad parent, uncaring. The logic of the story is faulty. The story itself, in the same way as other religious texts formed, is a compilation and redaction of religious myths, and has no consistent single author.


... Here is one Christian pastor's outlook:


www.byronbible.org...
...the only thing that makes "incest" sinful is that command of God. Prior to the Law being given to Moses, incest was a common event - even in the lives of the the Patriarchs (Abraham was married to his half-sister, Sarah). When the Law was given to Moses, God then condemned it and henceforth, it has been sin. Also, when Adam and Eve's children intermarried, the genetic information was so pure that there were no negative ramifications (such as mental slowness or physical debiliation).


Here is another Christian's response to the incest question. It is similar to the above response, but without the "the only thing wrong with incest is..." part.



www.christian-thinktank.com...
"At least two things can be said in response to this reproach. First, if the human race was propagated from a single pair, as we believe the evidence indicates, such closely related marriages were unavoidable. The demand for some other way of getting the race started is an unfair expectation. In the second place, the notion of incest must be probed more closely. At first the sin of incest was connected with sexual relationships between parents and children. Only afterward was the notion of incest extended to sibling relationships. By Moses’ time there were laws governing all forms of incest (Lev 18:7–17; 20:11–12, 14, 17, 20–21; Deut 22:30; 27:20, 22, 23). These laws clearly state that sexual relations or marriage is forbidden with a mother, father, stepmother, sister, brother, half brother, half sister, granddaughter, daughter-in-law, son-in-law, aunt, uncle or brother’s wife. The Bible, in the meantime, notes that Abraham married his half sister (Gen 20:12). Therefore, the phenomenon is not unknown in Scripture. Prior to Moses’ time, incest in many of the forms later proscribed were not thought to be wrong. Thus, even Moses’ own father, Amram, married an aunt, his father’s sister, Jochebed (Ex 6:20).


Zip



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Okay, just supposing I buy the concept that Adam and Eve had "Genetically pure DNA" where would it have stood after several generations of breeding to the point of Noah? And since if we take the Bible at it version of history, the world was destroyed and all life with it save those that were on board the ship (anyone want to guess what that thing smelled like after 30 days and nights with only 8 people? Who cleans that litter box?). Noah and his 3 sons and all their spouses were the only survivors.

So, if their genetics were so flawed, that God found it nessecary to scrap the whole experiment and start almost completely over what does that say for the genetic status of _their_ offspring? And again looking at incest and inbreeding to create a populace of millions/billions for the whole world, of all breeds/species of creatures.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:11 PM
link   
hey there people im a 1/4 jew and i lived in Israel for 8 years of my miserable life and had to study that tora and the tanah in school... adam and eva... just a story never happened... that god that the jews made up said u cant have sexual relations with ur
siblings and adam and eva did it so yea... never happened doesnt exist blah blah blah and on and on... u guys can believe what ever u want but i think that it neve happened



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
I'm a christian, and I heard some christian teachings admitting the story of creation is a myth: in fact they've said at the time it was created it was the "best" explanation that could end the questions about the creation raised among the believers.
It's a parabol same thing with the dude in the old testament that lived 900 years.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:29 PM
link   
yea just wut i said never happened couldnt ov happened was it that noah guy who live 900 years or did he live for only 600??? his organs would ov fallen apart



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:38 PM
link   
did this thread start because of the comedian on comedy central that uses this in his routine ?

anyway, incest aside, the implications of this myth are;

1) every human being on planet earth shares the same exact ancestors, literally. australian pygmies, eskomos, indians, american indians, swedes, poles etc.

2) we went from 2 to 6 billion people in a few thousand years. Most biblical scholars put the garden of eden at 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.





posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
did this thread start because of the comedian on comedy central that uses this in his routine ?

anyway, incest aside, the implications of this myth are;

1) every human being on planet earth shares the same exact ancestors, literally. australian pygmies, eskomos, indians, american indians, swedes, poles etc.

2) we went from 2 to 6 billion people in a few thousand years. Most biblical scholars put the garden of eden at 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.




Why is it said that the story of Adam and Eve started 6,000 years ago? The first human cave paintings were found to be 35,00 years old



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:46 PM
link   
anyone who believes in the adam and eve story that it literally happened is stupid. no question about it. you're dumb. sound blunt?...that's because it is. but at the end of the day if you believe that myth to be literally true then you are not an intelligent person. there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest the human race started from two people. there is no evidence to suggest the people, who we don't even know of that wrote genesis, even had god tell them this is how creation went down.

despite the lack of evidence, facts and so on, there are plenty of people who believe the adam and eve story to be literally true.

the scientific method: here are the facts. what conclusions can we draw from them?

the creationist method: here's the conclusion. what facts can we find to support it?



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Striker122

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
did this thread start because of the comedian on comedy central that uses this in his routine ?

anyway, incest aside, the implications of this myth are;

1) every human being on planet earth shares the same exact ancestors, literally. australian pygmies, eskomos, indians, american indians, swedes, poles etc.

2) we went from 2 to 6 billion people in a few thousand years. Most biblical scholars put the garden of eden at 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.



Why is it said that the story of Adam and Eve started 6,000 years ago? The first human cave paintings were found to be 35,00 years old


Actually, if you read it again, BIBLICAL scholars estimate the age at 6,000. They estimate the age based on the times listed in the bible. The ages of the "main characters" and number of years that passed between events, etc.

[edit on 28-6-2005 by Ariande Tau]



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:51 PM
link   
yeah. if the bible is interpreted literally then the earth and universe is about 10,000 years old. if you're not interpreting the bible literally then what's the point. its either true or not true...there's no inbetween. yet, this new age christians try to link evolution in with their religion and still say its o.k because they believe all the other stuff. most of the major doctrines some don't even believe now. the pope accepts evolution. the arch bishop of canterbury also does. many don't think there was an actual virgin birth, of which about 30% of vicars, priests, bishops said they didn't yet didn't want to share their personal beliefs with their church as they may lose their job etc. its all one big joke. its going down the pan and quick. religion is struggling to keep what sheep it has left in the flock.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by 5aret
So, now Adam and Eve were not perfect. When they were perfect, their genetic code was perfect also. So if them and their kids inbred, no mutations would come up. It takes a few generations for mistakes to show up in the genetic DNA. Thats why we cannot imbreed now. To many generations have gone by and there is to many mistakes in our genes now to do this. Don't believe me? Chack the statistics. Genetic disorders are on the rise, as the result of the "fall." Adam and Eve, according to some people, had 27 daughters and 25 sisters. THEY inbred. I doubt the brothers and sisters did their parents.

Do you get it now? If you do not, please tell me. Any questions?

5aret

[edit on 28-6-2005 by 5aret]


I think I understand you, but what I really wanna know is, how could our population go from two people, to 6 billion people in a matter of just a few tousand years.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 01:04 PM
link   



I think I understand you, but what I really wanna know is, how could our population go from two people, to 6 billion people in a matter of just a few tousand years.


Hmm, and we thought a family of 6 was big? But then if I remember my Bible history correctly, didn't Solomon have 100+ wifes and a couple hundred more children? Honey, definately time to get that second job.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 01:15 PM
link   
an arguement for being able to populate the earth in such a short space of time is there length of time people lived in the old testament.

i heard one theory that there was some extra layer of the atmosphere that let humans live in to their 900s. however, after the flood this layer was destroyed, yet noah still lived to the ripe old age of 900.

also you're taking in to account the death rate either which would have been quicker back then, diseases were easily caught, yet not easily treated. can we get some clever people to re-write the bible so it actually makes some sense?



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Hmm... Well, some Christians take the story of Adam and Eve literally, and think the Earth is 6,000 years old. Some Christians don't take the story literally, and believe in evolution and believe that the world is 4.5 billion years old. In between, there are all kinds of Christians of different combinations, accepting this, denying that, flavouring their religion with their favourite spices.

The fact is, the Bible doesn't say a damn thing about the DNA of Adam and Eve, obviously. Since Eve came "from Adam's rib," she's kind of like a female clone of him, in my mind, making their intercourse the epitomy of incest.

There's not much about the story that holds up under scrutiny.

Zip



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Well the times in the bible actualy say that the EArth is 6000 years old even though there are cave paintings older than this.
Also there is the fact that Adam and Eve -2 people would have had 2 blood types so they wouldnt be able to produce the 4 main we have today with their positives and negatives and so on.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   
To me, the Bible has been a collection of stories passed through the years.
In much the same manner of the "Fish I caught last week *holds fingers 10 inches apart*" goes to "That fish I caught last summer *holds fingers 2 feet apart*" to "That giant fish I caught 10 years ago *holding fingers arms width*" to "Remember that HUGE WHALE that swallowed Jonah?!?"

The more people that tell a tale, the bigger and more larger than life it becomes, until you are the Grimm brothers writing about a house made of gingerbread. I view most of the tales of the bible the same way. Cute stories that tell a decent lesson, or are just fun, the same way. I believe Noah fed some three thousand animals with his staff of 7 twice a day for several months about as much as I believe that Sleeping Beauty slept for 100 years. But, it does make for some cute decorations.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join