Inbreeding's Beginning

[Webers.Home]

.
• Gen 2:21a-22a . . So the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon the man; and,
while he slept, He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that spot.
And the Lord God fashioned the rib that He had taken from the man into a
oman;

The Hebrew word translated "rib" is tsela' (tsay-law') and Gen 2:21-22
contains the only two places in the entire Old Testament where it's
translated with an English word representing a skeletal bone.

In the other twenty-nine places, it's translated "side" which is really how
tsela' should be translated because according to Gen 2:23, the material
taken from Adam's body included some of his flesh; and seeing as how the
life of the flesh is in the blood (Lev 17:11) then I think it's safe to assume
that the flesh that God took from Adam's body to construct the woman
contained some of his blood too so that the flesh was living flesh instead of
dead.

In other words: we can accept "rib" if we allow it a description similar to a
barbecued rib; a serving that contains not bone alone rather, bone, blood,
and meat.

The most important thing to note in Gen 2:21a-22a is that Eve wasn't
created directly from the soil as Adam was, viz: Eve wasn't a discreet
creation, i.e. her gender isn't a unique specie.

Being as Eve was constructed with Adam's flesh, blood, and bones, then the
flesh, blood, and bones of her body were reproductions of his flesh, blood,
and bones with the result that Eve came into the world biologically related to
Adam, i.e. he was her father and she was his first child; so any discussion of
incest has to go all the way back to the very beginning and start with the
first couple instead of Cain and/or Seth.
_

 

[TheIndianGirl]

Being as Eve was constructed with Adam's flesh, blood, and bones, then the
flesh, blood, and bones of her body were reproductions of his flesh, blood,
and bones with the result that Eve came into the world biologically related to
Adam, i.e. he was her father and she was his first child; so any discussion of
incest has to go all the way back to the very beginning and start with the
first couple instead of Cain and/or Seth.

Eve was not a product of incest based on today's definitions, which involves sexual relations. Both were virgins likely and did not have knowledge of sex until the fall. Just because we are biologically related does not mean incestuous, that would make the whole world incestuous.

 

[Gideon300]

.
• Gen 2:21a-22a . . So the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon the man; and,
while he slept, He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that spot.
And the Lord God fashioned the rib that He had taken from the man into a
oman;

The Hebrew word translated "rib" is tsela' (tsay-law') and Gen 2:21-22
contains the only two places in the entire Old Testament where it's
translated with an English word representing a skeletal bone.

In the other twenty-nine places, it's translated "side" which is really how
tsela' should be translated because according to Gen 2:23, the material
taken from Adam's body included some of his flesh; and seeing as how the
life of the flesh is in the blood (Lev 17:11) then I think it's safe to assume
that the flesh that God took from Adam's body to construct the woman
contained some of his blood too so that the flesh was living flesh instead of
dead.

In other words: we can accept "rib" if we allow it a description similar to a
barbecued rib; a serving that contains not bone alone rather, bone, blood,
and meat.

The most important thing to note in Gen 2:21a-22a is that Eve wasn't
created directly from the soil as Adam was, viz: Eve wasn't a discreet
creation, i.e. her gender isn't a unique specie.

Being as Eve was constructed with Adam's flesh, blood, and bones, then the
flesh, blood, and bones of her body were reproductions of his flesh, blood,
and bones with the result that Eve came into the world biologically related to
Adam, i.e. he was her father and she was his first child; so any discussion of
incest has to go all the way back to the very beginning and start with the
first couple instead of Cain and/or Seth.
_

 

[Gideon300]

Not at all. Blood is made in bone marrow, Eve was formed, not born. So Adam was not Eve's father. This is an interesting article about blood. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/facts-about-blood

Remember that "the life is in the blood" so Adam in effect gave his life to Eve. This is symbolic of the relationship between Lord Jesus, "The last Adam" and His Bride, the Church. Lord Jesus gives His life to the Church, which His body. The Church is not Jesus, but the true Church is that which is taken out of Christ - and nothing else. So there is an aspect to the church that has nothing to do with sin, the fall, human failings.

Incest became a problem because of lack of genetic diversity. This can result in birth defects and serious health problems. It is safe to assume that every gene was present in Adam. Incest was only prohibited after Israel left Egypt. (Leviticus 18:7-18). By then, the nations were tribal and the gene pool less diverse. Because of the fall, genes were more likely to be defective also.

 

[Webers.Home]

.

Eve was not a product of incest based on today's definitions, which involves
sexual relations.

I reviewed the OP and was unable to find anything suggesting that Eve was
the product of incest: relationally or otherwise.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
It could be argued that Eve was Adam's sister; but neither she nor he were
produced by a common biological ancestor; rather, he was constructed from
dirt and she was constructed from Adam. That makes Eve his descendant
rather than his sibling.

It had to be that way because God wanted all human life to biologically
descend from just one source.

• Acts 17:26 . . From one man he made every nation of men

[ Every nation of men includes Pygmies, Inuit, Hispanic, African, Native
American, Germanic, Semitic, Polynesian, Aboriginal, Asian, etc. etc. ]

The inescapable conclusion to draw from God's decision is that Adam had to
sleep with his daughter to produce Cain, Abel, and Seth because there just
wasn't any other women in his world at the time. And besides: it was God
brought them together, viz: they were genuinely a match made in Heaven.
_

 

[Omegatime]

I see this thread leaning toward dangerous territory

 

[Aaron56]

.
• Gen 2:21a-22a . . So the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon the man; and,
while he slept, He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that spot.
And the Lord God fashioned the rib that He had taken from the man into a
oman;

The Hebrew word translated "rib" is tsela' (tsay-law') and Gen 2:21-22
contains the only two places in the entire Old Testament where it's
translated with an English word representing a skeletal bone.

In the other twenty-nine places, it's translated "side" which is really how
tsela' should be translated because according to Gen 2:23, the material
taken from Adam's body included some of his flesh; and seeing as how the
life of the flesh is in the blood (Lev 17:11) then I think it's safe to assume
that the flesh that God took from Adam's body to construct the woman
contained some of his blood too so that the flesh was living flesh instead of
dead.

In other words: we can accept "rib" if we allow it a description similar to a
barbecued rib; a serving that contains not bone alone rather, bone, blood,
and meat.

The most important thing to note in Gen 2:21a-22a is that Eve wasn't
created directly from the soil as Adam was, viz: Eve wasn't a discreet
creation, i.e. her gender isn't a unique specie.

Being as Eve was constructed with Adam's flesh, blood, and bones, then the
flesh, blood, and bones of her body were reproductions of his flesh, blood,
and bones with the result that Eve came into the world biologically related to
Adam, i.e. he was her father and she was his first child; so any discussion of
incest has to go all the way back to the very beginning and start with the
first couple instead of Cain and/or Seth.
_

Eve was the first son of God, son of man, insofar as her body was derived from Adam's.

This is the mystery of Christ and the church.

 

[Aaron56]

I see this thread leaning toward dangerous territory

The mature must be permitted to plunder the heaven of God, our natural home.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
Another biblical case of @home incest takes place in Genesis 19:30-38
where the two surviving daughters of Abraham's nephew Lot got their dad
drunk, and themselves knocked up.

The girls weren't motivated by naughty passions (though considering where
they grew up it wouldn't be surprising). They were honestly concerned about
one-- or possibly both --of two things: they'd either finish out their lives as
childless old maids or their father's family tree would terminate with him.

Anyway, long story short, the eldest girl became preggers with a baby boy
that she named Moab. From that little guy eventually came the very famous
woman named Ruth-- herself destined to become one of David's distant
grandmothers via her son Obed.
_

 

[Aaron56]

Now it seems to be going off the rails. ;/

 

[Webers.Home]

.

Ruth-- herself destined to become one of David's distant grandmothers via
her son Obed.

David is a key player in Christ's biological genealogy.

• Rev 22:16 . . I am the offspring of David

The Greek word translated "offspring" is genos (ghen'-os) which basically
refers to kin, viz: one's relatives.

Christ's kinship with David is quite a bit more specific in Rom 1:1-3 where it
says:

"Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to
the flesh"

The Greek word translated "seed" in that passage is sperma (sper'-mah)
which is a bit ambiguous because it can refer to spiritual progeny as well as
to biological progeny; for example:

• Gal 3:29 . . If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed.

That seed is obviously spiritual progeny; whereas David's is biological
because it's "according to the flesh" i.e. his physical human body.

So then, Jesus' flesh is David and Bathsheba's flesh, and David's flesh in
turn is Boaz and Ruth's flesh, and Boaz's flesh in turn is Adam and Eve's
flesh.

It's all pretty interesting when considering that Jesus' flesh is the result of
two of the most famous cases of incest on record-- Adam and Eve, and Lot
and his eldest daughter. But that was back when incest was much safer than
it is now.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
FAQ: Why was it not wrong for Adam, Eve, Lot, and Lot's daughters, to
commit incest? And let's not forget Isaac's parents Abraham and Sarah; they
were brother and sister!

A: According to Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13, and Gal 3:17 the laws of
God are not retroactive, viz: incest is not a violation where there is no rule
against it.
_