So about those gay people...

Any version I've read says "other sons and daughters." IIRC, no number is given. Genesis 5:4 also says Adam lived to be 800, suggesting he was not one person.

Unless Eve was really a rabbit, turning out litters every few months.

So either we've got a single monogamous couple who live for nine centuries, churning out hundreds of babies who grow up to marry each other.

Or "Adam" is a tribal name for the headman and his progeny, and the "other sons and daughters" are born of their wives and concubines over several generations.

Which is more likely? Hmmm...

Why do you even bother trying to make sense of it?

In Catholic school even the priest told us not to take the Bible literally... especially Genesis.

Adam and Eve is just a morality tale, and not even an original one. Most ancient civilizations have similar creation myths and flood myths.

I don't get why, after the apple thing, God didn't just go, "Yeah, fuck it, all right, I'll leave the magical knowledge-imparting food in the picture. Might be worth a few laughs."

I'm serious. I want to know why I can't go down to the 7-Eleven and get the Frito-Lay chips and jalapeno cheddar dip of the Knowledge of Day Trading.

Catholic school here, too, and that's what we were taught as well. But so many other "flavors" of Christianity take it literally. It's mind-boggling.

The dust bowl wiped out a lot of that good shit.

Now, about all that's left, is the burritos of Star Trek film criticism, the Cheetos of "dude...my hands are huge..", and the apple-tinis of "Glee", appreciation.

It's just, no one notices.

Seriously, are there still people on this planet who believe that Adam and Eve bollocks?

Jack & Jill is more logical than Adam and Eve. Hell, Hansel and Gtretal!

Mind you, I heard Hansel liked a bit of bratwurst.

Remember, kids, the Earth is only about 5,000 years old, and was created in seven days.

(Thankfully, the Columbia River Gorge disagrees!)

I've heard rumors that The Angus Bacon Cheeseburger of the Knowledge of What It's Like To Motorboat Christina Hendricks has been reintroduced into our FoR. I'm hunting that down as we post.

Well, this is one of many reasons I reject Catholicism in favor of Protestantism. I do not believe that Jesus needed a successor to lead the Christian movement as the VICAR OF CHRIST. Peter, Paul... they were good men, but they were men with shortcomings that befit all of us; they and all the other popes are not the Sons and Emissaries of God. I believe Christ's message is pretty clear. We're not living by Old Testament rules anymore. Your soul is saved through Grace, and when faced with a moral quandary, step back, think, and let your heart (conscience) guide you. It's the closest thing you have on this Earth to a cell number to God. And what he may tell you might not be what he tells someone else. Remember, God doesn't make junk. Everyone here is here for a reason of some sort. You know in your chest if what you are doing is wrong or right. That instinct was put there for a reason.

^Why isn't that movie available on Netflix?

Now the Jesuits are the more liberal of the Orders, but the way it was explained to us was that the Bible was True, not necessarily Factual.

I believe the Professor was named Henry Jones, Jr.

It's only "up for grabs" to folks who are only interesting in grabbing.

For the rest of us, it's up for study. If you are a person who puts any faith in it aty all (and obviously not everyone here is such a person) then even if you trake the approach I suggests it doers not - as Dicky supposes - wipe out the whole things. A lot of the more important stuff transcends cultural contexts.

And even a lot of the stuff which requires that context still holds implied meaning which goes beyond the specific point.

Storm's version was better.

Any church that tells women to shut their yaps is no church of mine.

50% of the most engaging conversations I have are with the fairer sex.

Women, speak your minds. I may not agree, but I'll listen respectfully and argue my case. Even if we never agree, odds are I'll smile and enjoy the company nevertheless, and what harm is there in that?

Really?

Congregation members regularly talk over the sermon in your church and no one cares?

It's rude in any presentation context if done by any sex.

Posted about a minute before this^ one:

http://www.wordforge.net/showpost.php?p=2365740&postcount=79

Sisters.

Even within the framework of a literalist reading of Genesis, the Bible says two important things which would explain this:

1. Adam lived hundreds of years
2. "he had other children"

Remembering that we are in the days before birth control, Eve (and whatever other wives might have come after) was surely cranking out one kid every 12-18 months (laying aside the possibility of multiples) and it seems unreasonable to assume a woman who'd live 6 or 700 years would become infertile before 50.

So if you assume a fertile period of, say, 300 years she'd have something like 200 kids

(yes i know the arguments about whether a woman could hold up to that many pregnancies and all the rest)

Which is a pretty ample population to select a wife from.


Also, in re the predictable counter argument about close-kin genetics, the standard (and reasonable in context) explanation is that human DNA has deteriorated since the Fall and at this point in history off-spring of close kin were at no greater risk of defect than any other child.

Furthermore, if you assume a minimum sibling group of 200, and you then assume that ever child in turn becomes a parent at, conservatively, 25, then by the time the youngest sibling is born, the oldest sibling is a great-great-great-great-great-great grandparent.

and each of those generations in turn making up hundreds of offspring.

Without doing the math, one can see how the population would be well into the thousands by the time Adam died, even if he and Eve really were the origin of all living humans.

Again, not taking a stand on whether this DID happen, just noting that within the context of what was said and very reasonable assumptions, it's a likely account for the answer to "Where did Cain and Abel get wives?"

Argument from silence proves nothing. Just because only three sons were named does not serve as any sort of proof that no other children were born.

furthermore:

Genesis 5-

Note for reference. Scholars understand that this geneology is the line which would lead to David and ultimately to Christ. It is NOT an account of all the children Adam had, obviously since Cain and Abel are not mentioned.

It's worth noting that when you and G said "it only mentions two sons" you are forgetting Seth who's mentioned by name here in Chapter 5.

STILL t would be a mistake tyo assume Cain was the first born, or that no other children were born between he and Abel, or between Abel and Seth. all we know is that the Bible does not see fit to discuss them in any way by name.

We do see that Adam had lived 130 years when Seth was born and the most likely interpretation is that he had fathers as many as 100 kids (many of whom may have died in infancy) before Seth was born - and among those were Cain and Abel and their wives.

if you plot all this out, you will note that Adam died, according to this account, six generations born after him mentioned by name.

also, an interesting bit of trivia, Methuselah died just about the same year as the flood.


Adam 130 when Seth is born
Adam 235 when Enosh (grandson by Seth) was born
Adam 315 when Kenan was born
Adam 385 when Mahalalel was born
Adam 450 when Jared was born.
Adam 712 when Enoch was born
Adam 777 when Methuselah was born
Adam died 34 years before Lamech was born.

Lamech was Noah's father. Altogether this would cover 1646 years from Creation to the Flood.Less than twice the length of Adam's life.

Within this context, at the outside edge - taking into account the Bible view of the world immediately after the fall which would be necessary to account for living almost a thousand years, - you could suppose that Adam fathered children for as much as 800 or more years. Even if half of them died before adulthood you are speaking of some 3-400 in the first generation, 90,000 or more in the second generation, and so forth.

context matters.

IF we are going to dismiss the context of the Genesis account, then it is completely pointless to even discuss the idea of an "Adam and Eve"

But IF we are going to discuss Adam and Eve, we can't simply ignore what the same account says about life expectancy.


By the way, if you are going to contrast the mythology with logic, no one has yet explained to me how a compatible male and female version of the same species evolved from their predecessor at the same time and place in order to successfully reproduce.

well yeah but if they were not literal than what to do with the whole "Adam and Steve" jibe?

there are a great many complex theological hypothesis-es why he made that choice

(again, speaking in context of literalist interpretation)

I have a thesis but i don't think I'll bother with it this late.

to be clear, to the extent i believe the Old Testament has relevance at all, I'm of the position that the stories were designed to impart a moral lesson (not unlike Aseop's Fables - just better sourced) and when it is said the Bible is "true" the idea is that the moral lessons. properly understood, are true - not that there actually was a talking snake or whatever.

And in turn those lessons were intended to lay the foundation for the message of Christ to a culture which would have been completely unready to process that message.

Either that or it's all BS. That's where the whole faith business gets involved i guess.

They're gay?

And they are fabulous!

Hayyyyy!!!!!!

Wow....that ranks right up there with Tony Montana in Scarface:

"I always tell the truth.....even when I lie!"

And yet Cain has to leave the land of his family, which is a terrible and extreme punishment that surprises him, and knows that he will meet lots of other humans elsewhere, whom he expects to want to kill him for profit. All of which means they are probably not his siblings. So if the version on the first few chapters of Genesis is considered all part of one straightforward edition, God must have made many more men and women after Adam and Eve; which, all things considered, isn't really a problem.

EDIT: Sorry, this belongs WAY upthread, I somehow missed a whole page.

Eve is the mother of all human life. So any male or female other than Adam can trace their lineage to her. Scripture says that Adam and Eve had "many sons and daughters." Josephus listed the total number as 23 sons and 33 daughters, IIRC, which is a Jewish tradition.

Keep in mind that Adam and Eve had, at this time, broken God's law. Keep in mind that the Law of Moses had not yet been given. Abraham, the father of the Jews, married his half sister!

So, obviously, Cain and all them other dudes married their sisters. Not as big an issue as it is today though - they had perfect bloodlines.