Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Privateer]

[Disclaimer: it's been a while and I haven't checked this.]

Adam and Eve lived for an inordinately long time and, it seems logical to assume, had a fair number of children although I believe only Cain, Abel, Seth, and an undetermined number of 'daughters' are mentioned explicitly. Reading between the lines, Adam and Eve's children married each other and produced all other humans. It's the only logically possible solution unless you assume Adam and Eve were not the first or the only people God created.

When Cain said he was afraid of other people those people can only have been his own siblings or nieces or nephews or grand-nephews, etc etc. We do not know how much time elapsed between Adam's creation, Cain's birth, and Abel's murder, nor how many children if any were born in those periods.

This does not mean the Bible promotes incest. Far from it. The incest between Adam and Eve's children was obviously a necessity. Other cases of incest are recounted in the Bible but not condoned.

I believe in evolution anyway.

[Moldy Rutabaga]

I am a practicing believer, but I don't personally believe that this portion of Genesis is meant to be taken literally. I don't want to criticize those who believe it is and I'll simply add my 2c by discussing the text within the text.

The land of Nod is not a literal city or place, but simply a Hebrew term meaning wandering, much as we would say in the 21st century "Nowheresville".

Some theologians believe that Genesis' list of genealogies is selective and not complete, so that if Adam and Eve were centuries old they may have had numerous generations of offspring by the time Cain and Abel rebelled (we always assume they were youngsters, but they may have been centuries old themselves). If so, they might not have been committing incest if they married a distant relative.

There is a later scene in the bible where young women-- it might even be Noah's daughters-- mistakenly believe that they are the last women on earth, and get their father drunk so that he will impregnate them (pretty virile father!). The implication that they do so reluctantly suggests that there was a taboo against incest, even if it was weaker then. Biologically, humans have enough 'redundancy' built into our genes to protect us from occasional incest.

Ken:>

[flakfizer]

Fiveeagles. You probably already know it, but there is an interesting site called, "Answers in Genesis." Here is a link to their common questions page. If you scroll down neaer the bottom, the question of, "Who was Cain's wife," is dealt with. If anyone else is intersted, take a look. You might not agree with them, but this group tries to explain things in relation to a pretty literal interpretation of the Bible. If you are a believer, you might enjoy some of the insight. If you are a mocker, you might find more fodder to ridicule. Here's the link:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp

[khyber]

forGET answers in genesis...that site is well beyond the realm of garbage.
It quotes itself to support it's own claim...THEN uses THAT claim to support a new one....damn terrible.

In no uncertain terms the Bible mentions "daughters of man" and "sons of God" as if to distinguish between the linneage (And obvious "divine touch") of adam and "another group".
I believe the words are found in the verse regarding Seth and his wife.

There are a number of different theories out there.
1) daughters of man is actually in reference to Adam's girls and that they mated with angels (?)... That "?" is there because that seems, sorta unlikely (it DOES however fulfill the "only adam and eve" were created story.

2) A few months ago, (discussing this in another forum) I stumbled upon a very well researched site that argued that the "daughters of man" was in reference to a group of humans outside of "the eden experience":

3) This link explains things more clearly:http://www.gotquestions.org/sons-of-God.html

One thing is for certain! Regardless of which of these anwers may be true, they both are BIG arguments in favour of evolution.
After all:

[flakfizer]

[ddeubel]

Quote:

One more question, can you see why people like five eagles perpetuate the image of christians as complete and utter stark raving bonkers lunatics?

Perpetuate an image? More like the reality. A lot of bad science on this thread and just scary hocus pocus. Five Eagles is like George Bush, making it up as he goes along......

The bigger question is -- I know these people can teach English BUT given that teaching is so much more than the subject at hand, HOW are these views polluting the minds of their innocent students? I think everyone should get a free BS detector, the moment they start going to school. I'm sure there is a factory is China somewhere making one.....

DD

I'd suggest a great book on this subject - The Great Code, Northrope Frye. Would be a breath of fresh air.

[The Man known as The Man]

huck-perhaps our concern would be better placed over the fact that your mother is indeed your aunt.

[khyber]

[seoulunitarian]