Adam and Eve

[Tintin]

With all due respect and not wanting to insult anyone, not knowing "How else could the human race have grown?" does not constitute sound proof that Adam and Eve;s children had children together. It is like saying that if someone who has never seen an airplane nor knows about what it is, would say that the only way his cousins were able to go from California to Hawaii in a few hours was only possible because they were able to catch rides on some giant eagles.

This comparison you've created is stupid beyond words and you know it. This isn't Lord of the Rings. We're talking about true history.

 

[Stephen63]

Sigh...... everybody asks about who Cain married & had kids by, when Adam took a wife that was perhaps genetically a female version of himself..... his rib, his genetic code, right? A genetically perfect woman, made from a genetically perfect man.

All this was before the Law. There was two commandments at that time, as I recall: 1. Don't eat of the tree of knowledge of good & evil 2. Be fruitful & multiply.

That's my two cents worth.

 

[Magenta]

Sigh...... everybody asks about who Cain married & had kids by, when Adam took a wife that was perhaps genetically a female version of himself..... his rib, his genetic code, right? A genetically perfect woman, made from a genetically perfect man.

That's my two cents worth.

I tend to think that Adam was a complete person unto himself, with all the genetic info that comprises what we now understand to be the masculine and feminine aspects or characteristics all wrapped up into one person, and then God split the genetically female aspects away from him to create Eve as his perfect helpmeet, that would again become as one flesh in their union. Just my two cents worth

 

[thebesttrees]

This comparison you've created is stupid beyond words and you know it. This isn't Lord of the Rings. We're talking about true history.

Exo 19:4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.

Were you there to see that this did not actually happen?!

 

[Tintin]

I am not concerned about the other methods or scenarios. No I do not believe that we came from monkeys. No I do not believe that God created many Adams and Eves. But at the same time, I try to understand what the Bible teaches and not to jump into conclusions.

For me the Word of God is primarily guidance that I need to become closer to my Lord spiritually. In doing so, I try to understand the meaning of "flesh" in these two verses of Genesis 2:

23The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”

24That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.

Does the "flesh" in verse 23 mean the same as the "flesh" in verse 24?

Oh, you're another of those people here at CC who makes everything a parable. Blah.

 

[Tintin]

Exo 19:4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.

Were you there to see that this did not actually happen?!

You don't know how to read the Bible. That's figurative language. This is English 101. Good grief.

 

[Tintin]

This is not something you need to suppose because it’s in the bible. Seth was born when Adam was 130 years old (Gen. 5:3). When Seth was born (Adam’s 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] son), Eve said “For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed.” Cain was the firstborn so we know Adam was a lot younger than 130 when he had Cain.

And when you go through the genealogy of Adam in Genesis 5 Cain is not mentioned because he was banished and not living among Adam’s decedents but was living in another region (the land of Nod) who were another people unrelated to Adam. Cain’s resulting genealogy is mentioned earlier in Gen 6: 16-24. Adam’s decedents begin with Seth (his 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] born) not with Cain. We can see therefore that Cain did not intermarry with any of Adam’s decedents which is why these two genealogies (Adam’s and Cain’s) are separately mentioned.

Seth was Adam's 3rd son, mentioned by name. Not third son. Adam and Eve didn't have just daughters for 130 years! As for why Cain's descendants aren't mentioned in Adam's genealogy, it's because it's considered with Seth's bloodline, the one that would lead to the Messiah. That doesn't mean that Cain didn't intermarry with Adam's descendants (Cain's own sisters or nieces etc.).

 

[Tintin]

No need to address the rest of your commentary because it was all based upon the premise that “Adam and Eve were the only humans alive at the time…" which I don’t see evidence of in the scripture.

Because you've been influenced by the evolutionary/old ages mind-set of our times. There's nothing in the Bible, reading it plainly, to account for long-ages and humans others than Adam and Eve. None whatsoever. But good try.

 

[tanach]

thebesttrees I am not throwing reason out the door its speculation that is being given the boot. Yes God wants us to use understanding but when plain language is used we should understand it plainly not spiritualise it. The Bible normally explains parts that are not to be taken literally. God doesn't communicate with riddles.. If he had created more than one pair of humans, the Bible would have said so plainly and this debate would not be happening. As for Science I only mentioned that because you did. It might seem genetically impossible for the human race to be produced from one couple, but this is God we are talking about. The same god who brought about the virgin birth, another impossibility. Science is not about faith, its about having a theory and then looking for evidence to support it, or at least so it should be.

 

[thebesttrees]

You don't know how to read the Bible. That's figurative language. This is English 101. Good grief.

It is not about English 101. It is about understanding and reason. And you would call me delusional if I tell you the rock here is Jesus Christ

Exodus 17:6 Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.

 

[KJV1611]

You don't know how to read the Bible. That's figurative language. This is English 101. Good grief.

Is Exodus 19:4 figurative or symbolic language?

 

[thebesttrees]

thebesttrees I am not throwing reason out the door its speculation that is being given the boot. Yes God wants us to use understanding but when plain language is used we should understand it plainly not spiritualise it. The Bible normally explains parts that are not to be taken literally. God doesn't communicate with riddles.. If he had created more than one pair of humans, the Bible would have said so plainly and this debate would not be happening. As for Science I only mentioned that because you did. It might seem genetically impossible for the human race to be produced from one couple, but this is God we are talking about. The same god who brought about the virgin birth, another impossibility. Science is not about faith, its about having a theory and then looking for evidence to support it, or at least so it should be.

I agree with you that with God everything is possible. But I also believe that God wants us to understand His ways. He tests us by doing this to see how sincere we are in our ways to recognize Him and love Him. How proudly the Israelite thought they knew the Old Testament and yet they failed to see the King in the garb of a normal human being and crucified Him. As I said in a post a couple of minutes ago on this same thread, asserting that the rock here is Jesus Christ would label me as lunatic and mad:

Exodus 17:6 Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.

I feel sorry for the folks who do not believe in our Lord as no matter how much they read this passage they will not understand that the rock is Jesus Christ. Why? Because they do not read to understand. They simply read for the sake of reading and not knowing that God wants understanding and loves to test us in His ways.

 

[Tintin]

It is not about English 101. It is about understanding and reason. And you would call me delusional if I tell you the rock here is Jesus Christ

Exodus 17:6 Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.

Actually, it is English 101. Here. It's both physical and spiritual (historical truth and figurative). And yes, the rock points forward to Jesus. That's Common Knowledge 101. Nice try switching the train tracks though.

 

[thebesttrees]

Actually, it is English 101. Here. It's both physical and spiritual (historical truth and figurative). And yes, the rock points forward to Jesus. That's Common Knowledge 101. Nice try switching the train tracks though.

1 Corinthians 10

1For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. 2They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 3They all ate the same spiritual food 4and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.

In all fairness, now tell me would anyone dare say, that rock was Jesus Christ by the simple reading of the account in Exodus?! We have this knowledge because of the understanding given to us by Paul.

 

[Tintin]

1 Corinthians 10

1For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. 2They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 3They all ate the same spiritual food 4and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.

In all fairness, now tell me would anyone dare say, that rock was Jesus Christ by the simple reading of the account in Exodus?! We have this knowledge because of the understanding given to us by Paul.

Again, few would debate with you regarding this Exodus account. But you're switching the tracks. This is very different to what you're proposing concerning Adam and Eve.

 

[Jenizona]

As a new member I have a question that has been bothering me- I am curious about Christianity. Did Adam and Eve's children have children with each other? This is a question I have had problems with considering Christianity.
I would appreciate some enlightening on this topic.

Many thanks,

Charlie

Hey, Charlie, I don't know if you're still around, looks like you haven't posted anything in a couple of days, but if you do get around to reading this, just wanted to add my two cents worth!

As a history major (yayyy!), I can tell you that one major problem (Get it... major.. history maj...nvm) is that people tend to look at historical events through the lens of modernity. We all do it.

I remember when I was a kid and I was watching Masterpiece Theater and some formal, overly-stiff-but-very-well-dressed British characters were talking about cousins who were going to be married. I looked all confused, and my mom just said, "Oh, they used to do that all the time." They still do it on Downton Abbey! And it still causes my modern mind to cringe, just a little.

And if you look at sex in the Middle Ages, it was even weirder! Don't get me started! Yikes!

But I just wanted to reassure you, that's not specifically a "Bible" thing or a "Christian" thing. It's a historical thing. Things didn't always work back then, the way they work now, and we shouldn't let our modern minds get too much in a twist about it. We've turned out okay! For the most part.

 

[Bowman]

1 Corinthians 10

1For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. 2They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 3They all ate the same spiritual food 4and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.

In all fairness, now tell me would anyone dare say, that rock was Jesus Christ by the simple reading of the account in Exodus?! We have this knowledge because of the understanding given to us by Paul.

There are clues in the Exodus narrative that describe Malek Yahweh (i.e. The Son) leading the way through the sea, etc...

 

[thebesttrees]

Again, few would debate with you regarding this Exodus account. But you're switching the tracks. This is very different to what you're proposing concerning Adam and Eve.

I have one simple question and I will not bother you on this again.

Would you conclude that the rock "that Moses smote to get water" was Jesus Christ by the simple reading of the account in Exodus?! Is there anything in those verses in Exodus that tells you that the rock that provided water for the thirsty Israelite was Jesus Christ?

Yes or no?

 

[Tintin]

I have one simple question and I will not bother you on this again.

Would you conclude that the rock "that Moses smote to get water" was Jesus Christ by the simple reading of the account in Exodus?! Is there anything in those verses in Exodus that tells you that the rock that provided water for the thirsty Israelite was Jesus Christ?

Yes or no?

No. Not Jesus specifically, but it was definitely a God-ordained moment to teach the people of Israel:

The Lord said to Moses, “Go on ahead of the people, and take some of the elders of Israel with you; take in your hand the staff with which you struck the Nile, and go. I will be standing there in front of you on the rock at Horeb. Strike the rock, and water will come out of it, so that the people may drink.” Moses did so, in the sight of the elders of Israel.

Exodus 17:5-6

Like you said. To gain that understanding one must read the necessary passage from the appropriate book. The Old Testament must be read in light of the New Testament.

 

[Rockbysea]

Seth was Adam's 3rd son, mentioned by name. Not third son. Adam and Eve didn't have just daughters for 130 years! As for why Cain's descendants aren't mentioned in Adam's genealogy, it's because it's considered with Seth's bloodline, the one that would lead to the Messiah. That doesn't mean that Cain didn't intermarry with Adam's descendants (Cain's own sisters or nieces etc.).

And maybe Cain was Adams 1st Son, mentioned by name. Not first son. And maybe Abel was his 2nd son, mentioned by name. Not second son. And maybe Eden was the 1st Garden, mentioned by name. Not first Garden. Maybe there were many other Gardens God planted during those 130 years. And maybe God was displeased with some of Adam's other sons and daughters who sinned (perhaps murder, sexual immorality etc...) that were born to Adam, between the time of Abel and Cain, and God banished them from his presence to the land of Nod where they welcomed Cain later on after his banishment. So you had all these banished children of Adam living in Nod. And maybe all those sons he had besides Cain and Abel, but before Seth, were not qualified for the Messiah’s bloodline because they too were banished for displeasing the Lord by their offering and sins.

Maybe you have the Jewish Talmudic mindset where rabbinical interpretation of the Torah creates another “holy” book.