it is said that the first people on earth were adam and eve,right? okay then eve gave birth to two son's right? they were called kane and able right? okay then eve went into the land of nod to find another bed partener,which means she selpt with one of her own son's as there were only four people on earth, adam/eve/kane and able.

ask the visitor, i think he said in some other thread she ended up banging a dragon or serpent. turns out that because of it we are all half human snakes and sons of perdition or something. obviously none of it ever really happened.

Why is it, when you point out the bible says we all came from Adam and Eve christians get very outraged when we point out that makes humans all extremely inbred?

I know just where to find the answer! Mark Twain once uncovered extracts from Adam's diary (you can even get them online!)

Some excerpts:

SATURDAY. -- I escaped last Tuesday night, and
traveled two days, and built me another shelter in a
secluded place, and obliterated my tracks as well as I
could, but she hunted me out by means of a beast
which she has tamed and calls a wolf, and came
making that pitiful noise again, and shedding that
water out of the places she looks with. I was
obliged to return with her, but will presently emi-
grate again when occasion offers. She engages her-
self in many foolish things; among others, to study
out why the animals called lions and tigers live on
grass and flowers, when, as she says, the sort of teeth
they wear would indicate that they were intended to
eat each other. This is foolish, because to do that
would be to kill each other, and that would introduce
what, as I understand it, is called "death"; and
death, as I have been told, has not yet entered the
Park. Which is a pity, on some accounts.

TUESDAY. -- She told me she was made out of a
rib taken from my body. This is at least doubtful,
if not more than that. I have not missed any rib.
....She is in much trouble about the buzzard;
says grass does not agree with it; is afraid she can't
raise it; thinks it was intended to live on decayed
flesh. The buzzard must get along the best it can
with what it is provided. We cannot overturn the
whole scheme to accommodate the buzzard.

SATURDAY. -- She fell in the pond yesterday when
she was looking at herself in it, which she is always
doing. She nearly strangled, and said it was most
uncomfortable. This made her sorry for the crea-
tures which live in there, which she calls fish, for
she continues to fasten names on to things that don't
need them and don't come when they are called by
them, which is a matter of no consequence to her,
she is such a numskull, anyway; so she got a lot of
them out and brought them in last night and put
them in my bed to keep warm, but I have noticed
them now and then all day and I don't see that they
are any happier there than they were before, only
quieter. When night comes I shall throw them
outdoors. I will not sleep with them again, for I
find them clammy and unpleasant to lie among when
a person hasn't anything on.

TUESDAY. -- She has taken up with a snake now.
The other animals are glad, for she was always ex-
perimenting with them and bothering them; and I
am glad because the snake talks, and this enables me
to get a rest.

FRIDAY. -- She says the snake advises her to try
the fruit of that tree, and says the result will be a
great and fine and noble education. I told her there
would be another result, too -- it would introduce
death into the world, That was a mistake -- it had
been better to keep the remark to myself; it only
gave her an idea -- she could save the sick buzzard,
and furnish fresh meat to the despondent lions and
tigers. I advised her to keep away from the tree.
She said she wouldn't. I foresee trouble. Will
emigrate.

WEDNESDAY. -- I have had a variegated time. I
escaped last night, and rode a horse all night as fast
as he could go, hoping to get clear out of the Park
and hide in some other country before the trouble
should begin; but it was not to be. About an hour
after sun-up, as I was riding through a flowery plain
where thousands of animals were grazing, slumber-
ing, or playing with each other, according to their
wont, all of a sudden they broke into a tempest of
frightful noises, and in one moment the plain was a
frantic commotion and every beast was destroying
its neighbor. I knew what it meant -- Eve had
eaten that fruit, and death was come into the world.
....The tigers ate my horse, paying no attention
when I ordered them to desist, and they would have
eaten me if I had stayed...

Maybe the rest of the diary explains where all the kids came from....

I have heard that there were other women, but they weren't talked about, since only the men mattered. Eve was mentioned only to place the blame on all women for her eating of the fruit.

all women didn't eat the fruit, only eve did, and it was not her fault, it was the serpents fault.

she ended up banging a dragon or serpent

lol. Since I have retired from the forum for a few days, I can look at it a little more lighthearted. I don't know, myself. Maybe that happened. Or maybe God made their offspring mates, I don't think the bible says.
But if I look at it the way I think happened, Adam and Eve are just metaphors for the the evolution of man into homo sapiens. So maybe there were a few more Adam and Eves. I'd like to hear an experienced christian say also.

lol. Since I have retired from for a few days, I can look at it a little more lighthearted. I don't know, myself. Maybe that happened. Or maybe God made their offspring mates, I don't think the bible says.
But if I look at it the way I think happened, Adam and Eve are just metaphors for the the evolution of man into homo sapiens. So maybe there were a few more Adam and Eves. I'd like to hear an experienced christian say also.
of COURSE Adam and Eve are metaphors. the biblical tale is patriarchal propaganda!

EVE is representing the Goddess, and woman and her religious rituals which the patriarchy/writers of this patrirchal mythic propaganda want to defame and destroy
ADAm representing mankind is a victim of 'her'...'seduced' 'led astray' from the authoritarain 'God'

The Tree/Fruit/Serpent/Garden all reprsnt the psychedelic sacrament and its ecstasy

and the 'original sin' as defined by the patriarchs is their eating of the'Fruit'

see in the tale when authoritaran voice warns that tey mustn't eat of te fruit from the 'Tree of Life' 'less they become gods'. tis means that age old Indigenus sacramental communal rites are being busted by this male elite...because it is the 'word of God' such activity becomes deemed 'original sin'....!they then are to become misreable slaves workin fo my maaaan

so whats changed??

it is said that the first people on earth were adam and eve,right? okay then eve gave birth to two son's right? they were called kane and able right? okay then eve went into the land of nod to find another bed partener,which means she selpt with one of her own son's as there were only four people on earth, adam/eve/kane and able.


Just because kane and able where the only childeren mentioned by the scriptures does not mean that they where the only ones.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Adam and Eve had plenty of children, and I think the Bible mentions several others. The fun starts when you look at the myths that didn't make it to the KJV Bible, where you indeed had another woman:

"The passage in Genesis 1:27 — "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them" (before describing a mate being made of Adam's rib and being called Eve in Genesis 2:22) is sometimes believed to be an indication that Adam had a wife before Eve.

A medieval reference to Lilith as the first wife of Adam is the anonymous The Alphabet of Ben-Sira, written sometime between the 8th and 11th centuries. Lilith is described as refusing to assume a subservient role to Adam during sexual intercourse and so deserting him ("She said, 'I will not lie below,' and he said, 'I will not lie beneath you, but only on top. For you are fit only to be in the bottom position, while I am to be the superior one.'"). Lilith promptly uttered the name of God, took to the air, and left the Garden, settling on the Red Sea coast. As a side note, this places Lilith in a unique position, for she left the Garden of her own accord and before the Fall of Man, and so is untouched by the Tree of Knowledge. However, according to legend, she also knows the "true name of God".

Lilith then went on to mate with Asmodai and various other demons she found beside the Red Sea, creating countless lilin. Adam urged God to bring Lilith back, so three angels were dispatched after her. When the angels, Senoy, Sansenoy, and Semangelof, made threats to kill one hundred of Lilith's demonic children for each day she stayed away, she countered that she would prey eternally upon the descendants of Adam and Eve, who could be saved only by invoking the names of the three angels. She did not return to Adam."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilith

I know just where to find the answer! Mark Twain once uncovered extracts from Adam's diary (you can even get them online!)
....
C.C. posted;..." Ask the visitor, i think he said in some other thread she ended up banging a dragon or serpent"




Thats pretty good....real entertaining stuff.
To be clear about one thing,... the creature that I said Eve was seduced by was only "called" a serpent....thats the name given by Adam to the closest humaniod species next to man.
It walked upright talked and was able to mix with humans, being the closest species.
God changed every form afterwards....after it pregnated Eve, it was changed into a snakelike creature.

But the harm was done...Cain was born, though Eve said "I've gotten a man from the Lord", all life has to follow a law of reproduction, and those laws were set forth by the Lord.
Cain was of his father the wicked one.....that wasn't Adam.
Adam was made in the image of God, as a son of god.
Cain then passed the original traits of the serpent on to his offspring.
that made two races, the sons of god..(Adams linage), and the sons of men..(Cains linage.....passing on the seed of the serpent)

I never said it was a snake or dragon....it was a humaniod....the missing link.
They were giants...10-12' tall, not human, a seperate species used by unclean spirits as hosts.
Though long gone many of thier traits still exist in mankind today.
God has been in control all along and has just the right mixture in man to serve His purpose.

Thats pretty good....real entertaining stuff.
To be clear about one thing the thing I said that what Eve was seduced by was only "called" a serpent....thats the name given by Adam to the closest humaniod species next to man.
It walked upright talked and was able to mix with humans, being the closest species.
God changed every form afterwards....after it pregnated Eve, it was changed into a snakelike creature.

But the harm was done...Cain was born, though Eve said "I've gotten a man from the Lord", all life has to follow a law of reproduction, and those laws were set forth by the Lord.
Cain was of his father the wicked one.....that wasn't Adam.
Adam was made in the image of God, as a son of god.
Cain then passed the original traits of the serpent on to his offspring.
that made two races, the sons of god..(Adams linage), and the sons of men..(Cains linage.....passing on the seed of the serpent)

I never said it was a snake or dragon....it was a humaniod....the missing link.
They were giants...10-12' tall, not human, a seperate species used by unclean spirits as hosts.
Though long gone many of thier traits still exist in mankind today.
God has been in control all along and has just the right mixture in man to serve His purpose.


you sound like someone on acid. there were no giants or humanoid serpents, lets face it. and i believe at one point you definitely did call some of us - "half-human snakes".

she slept with one of her own son's
Giggidy giggidy...
she ended up banging a dragon.
...Giggidy Goo.
:D

To be clear about one thing the thing I said that what Eve was seduced by was only "called" a serpent

:rolleyes: Ah! man are you still confused? That's what Adam called his willy. :p

I'm not endorsing anything, but...

I would see no problem with an incestuous relationship between the first of a species. Any other alternative means extinction. It would have to be either mother-son, father-daughter or brother-sister, no other alternatives. Imagine that you and someone of the opposite sex are the only ones left alive (and assuming you want a world repopulated with humans), I can't believe that even the most closed-minded person would not see the inevitability and profit of incest.

Max

Imagine that you and someone of the opposite sex are the only ones left alive (and assuming you want a world repopulated with humans), I can't believe that even the most closed-minded person would not see the inevitability and profit of incest.

Max

thats a really unrealistic scenario and im sure that it isnt what happened in the first place. if you repopulated the world as a result of incestuous relationships the population wouldnt last too long because there wouldnt be extremely limited genetic diversity and a particular disease could wipe everyone out.

(to start, I would point out that I no longer actually believe the Bible is "true", but rather it's an interesting journal of an ancient people: has some useful points, has some silly points, has a bunch of noone-really-cares-anymore points ...)

(but, I USED to be one of those rampant "born-again-ers", back when my mind was still like that of a child .. <heh>)

There are 2 possible "excuses"- pardon, explanations for where Able got his bride that are often tossed about by True Believers.

The first is that Able married a sister that Adam & Even concieved after the Fall. Since it was Some Time Later (caps intentional), these additional offspring were not enumerated specifically.

As for the genetic diversity, if you postulate that Adam & Eve were created (*boom* using God's "magic voice") from essentially nothing, you can also postulate that their genes were perfect and flawless: i.e. without genetic defects you'd expect. This would allow the children of Adam and Eve to intermarry without the usual worry about defective children. It is also stated that the genetic defects we see today, is as result of sin, which "poisons" our blood lines. It is one explination for the many statements in the Bible that say "the sins will last for 7 generations" implying that God's punishment for whatever infraction, was a genetic one.

(I know, this is a silly and simplistic excuse, and ignorant of basic biology. I'm only repeating what I had been told, when I asked these Hard Questions as a child.)

...

The 2nd possible explanation of the source of Able's wife, is that if you read Genisis carefully, there seems to be 2 versions of Creation in there. I won't bore you with specifics (you can read the 1st couple of chapters online easily enough), but the first part with the 7-day stuff is closely followed with a 2nd Creation Story, wherein God says roughly 'Let Us make Men and Women. Let Us make Them in Our Image.' Note here that the original text (as old as can be found, with current methods) used plural words for "man" and "woman", implying that for this Creation Event, there were more than just Adam and Eve coming into being.

To reconcile these two stories, Literalists often cite the 2nd story as an additional Creation Event, and the Men and Women thus created were NOT direct decendants of Adam and Eve (who eventually become the Ancestors of Jesus, the Whole Point according to some). These "extra" Men and Women become the ancestors of everyone ELSE in the world, who is not to become an Israelite.

Thus, Able's wife came from a gentile, as decended from these others.

...

It's Amazing what you can do with a little Creative Interpretation, is it not? (and yet these folk who "taught" me these tales claimed to have Literal Intrepretation).

thats a really unrealistic scenario and im sure that it isnt what happened in the first place. if you repopulated the world as a result of incestuous relationships the population wouldnt last too long because there wouldnt be extremely limited genetic diversity and a particular disease could wipe everyone out.

Interesting...I'm unable to see any other way that only two of a species could repopulate the Earth.

My comment was not addressed to the "real possibility" of the continued existence of human kind from the incestuous relationship of the only two in a species; but WAS addressed to the emotional reaction that people are supposed to have with regard to the possibility that Adam and Eve and their immediate offspring had incestuous relations in order to produce you and me. My simplified answer was: "Do what you have to do."

And (unfortunately) to reiterate, the psychology of the mind at the time would be that the only way to repopulate the Earth with only two of a species will inevitably lead to incestuous relations. If you can think of another way, it would have to be beyond modern science and common sense, and therefore must have some supernatural ramifications.

Max

The Bible does not say that Adam and Eve were the only "beings" on earth at that time. It states quite the opposite actually. It just says that they were created (their flesh, that is). It doesn't say that they were the first to be created, or the last. Words used like "replenish" and "repopulate" signify that they were definitely not the first, but were to replace what was depleted or diminished. That doesn't mean the population had been depleted entirely. It wasn't depleted entirely with the flood. Who knows how many times God has almost wiped the slate clean, and started over? Logic states that Genesis is not the beginning, just as Revelation is not the end. I mean, we're talking eternity here...infinity...a dimension without time. So there is no beginning and no end...that's just kind of an illusion that we buy into due to the constraints of our flesh and being in this physical world.

In the context of orthodoxy, I think Bob is right, that would be their explanation.

In terms of the science of evolution, I think the change to what we would consider a full human happens gradually, with no first couple required. Dawkins talks about a mitochondrial Eve, I'm not sure I understand it completely.

From a textualist standpoint I think it would make perfect sense for there to be a true blood (a genetically superior race such as Adam and Eve) and a tainted blood (a genetically inferior race). The mixing of blood produces the disease vulnerable creatures we are today.

This is definitely a creative interpretation, but was a document like the Bible ever intended to be anything but a collection of creative interpretations? Since no society or "age" or person is alike, I would have to assume that the only way such a document could ever survive is if it was to be considered as a "book of creative interpretations."

Time is not static, why must interpretation of the Bible be as well?

Max

Time is not static, why must interpretation of the Bible be as well?Max

Good point.

One I used to Ask, back in the Day. (I was, of course handed a "pat" answer that was, upon closer examination, really a "non-answer", like "It's the Mystery of God" or other nonsense.)

I would also point out, that Language itself, is a very dynamic Thing (sort of like the Ozone Layer: it is continually being created and destroyed, it's in a constant state of flux).

Since Language is so dynamic, and Language is one of our Basis for Thinking, it follows that as Language changes over time, so must Human Thought.

If the above is True, then, our Understanding of the Bible, must be Different than that of it's original writers.

(but this is a bit off-thread ...)

I don't think it's off-thread at all.

The original question was supposed to "challenge" the way the Bible is interpreted. The question revolved completely around there only being 4 people on Earth at the time of reproduction, which is nothing but one interpretation.

And since language is the most critical part of interpretation, that point is also directly relevant.

Not only are we limited by our language (there are some things that simple words can never accurately describe), our perception of the world around us is also limited to five senses, distance and time.

These factors should be taken into consideration when viewing a document like the Bible. If I could only see from horizon to horizon and travel 10 miles a day, flooding my backyard will appear to be as if the entire world was flooded. We know the entire world wasn't flooded (no one needs to cling to that), but from the perspective of the author, the "entire world" was flooded.

Max

The Bible does not say that Adam and Eve were the only "beings" on earth at that time. It states quite the opposite actually. It just says that they were created (their flesh, that is). It doesn't say that they were the first to be created, or the last. Words used like "replenish" and "repopulate" signify that they were definitely not the first, but were to replace what was depleted or diminished. That doesn't mean the population had been depleted entirely. It wasn't depleted entirely with the flood. Who knows how many times God has almost wiped the slate clean, and started over? Logic states that Genesis is not the beginning, just as Revelation is not the end. I mean, we're talking eternity here...infinity...a dimension without time. So there is no beginning and no end...that's just kind of an illusion that we buy into due to the constraints of our flesh and being in this physical world.
Very good explanation....
Not only was there a race of animals closest in creation to Man .i.e.;Adam.....
(man in the day he was created)
But one from this race .i.e.(the serpent), that fathered Cain, created a hybrid mix in Cain, the "Sons of Men", as apposed to the pure Adamic line with representation in God as His "gene seeds" to be manifested in this world as the "Son of God"
We don't know how many there were of this species, the "serpent"...at least two male and female, and only the male was changed in the curse.
The two creations refered to, are refering to the creation of the spiritual man who would inhabit a realm of heaven which do have bodies,.....a theophany or "Word" body where sons of god would stand in representation for "flesh" man that would be here in this dimension of earth in physical bodies made from the earth to "till the soil".
The fall seperated this connection causing the immortality of man in this dimension to be lost
(This is explaned much better than I am doing here in a message titled "who is this Melchesidic"...delivered by a prophet named William Branham in 1965)
http://www.nathan.co.za/message.asp?sermonum=1087
There also may have been "pre-adamic" civilizations.....as you have very well gathered from the way ......
1)...the earth was covered with water and void or desolate, as from a previous destruction, and
2).. the references to "replentish" the earth.
3)..the fallen spirits were speaking through and possessing hosts of the serpent.....a species right next in the creation to man.
4) The bible which is the Word is concerned with God and his creation in this world.....it does speak of a new heavens and a new earth to come also.

Jesus is the begining of the creation of God, and we as the sons of God become manifested here with Him the Captain of our salvation, the first born of many brethen.
The Jehovah of the Old Testament is the Jesus of the New.
We are his genes, his attributes becoming material and expressed.
God is the Word....what is in that Word is what we have need of.
Someday we will know all things......there are a lot of questions, for sure.
Got to go..

... We know the entire world wasn't flooded (no one needs to cling to that), but from the perspective of the author, the "entire world" was flooded.Max


Aaaah, you'd be surprised ....

But, then again, maybe not.

I try to never underestimate the power of Human Self-Delusion .. :p

"Every time I think I've seen the absolute limit of human stupidity, some moron like you comes along and fucks everything up."
-anonymous poster at SpaceBattles.com

:D :p

of COURSE Adam and Eve are metaphors. the biblical tale is patriarchal propaganda!

EVE is representing the Goddess, and woman and her religious rituals which the patriarchy/writers of this patrirchal mythic propaganda want to defame and destroy
ADAm representing mankind is a victim of 'her'...'seduced' 'led astray' from the authoritarain 'God'

The Tree/Fruit/Serpent/Garden all reprsnt the psychedelic sacrament and its ecstasy

and the 'original sin' as defined by the patriarchs is their eating of the'Fruit'

see in the tale when authoritaran voice warns that tey mustn't eat of te fruit from the 'Tree of Life' 'less they become gods'. tis means that age old Indigenus sacramental communal rites are being busted by this male elite...because it is the 'word of God' such activity becomes deemed 'original sin'....!they then are to become misreable slaves workin fo my maaaan

so whats changed??

You have it back words, Eve was the one tricked and Adam consumed willingly. Adam listinged
to Eve instead of God. He makes the choice to actively disobey, while Eve is tricked.. That’s
why God questioned Adam about were He got the fruit and Adam said his wife gave it to him,
and she said the snake tricked me.

Go back and read the story again. Your interpretations have no foundations in the text.

As Bob and Lori eluded to, where does the Old Testament say that these were the only people on earth?
Keep in mind that the Tanakh was written as a history of a specific people, Israelites.
The Tanakh is about these people alone, not all people.
It does not deny that other peole exist.
Just as YHVH is the God of the Israelites.
The Tanakh does not deny the existence of the Gods of other people, in fact it outright acknowledges other Gods, but it is ABOUT YHVH.
Just as it is ABOUT Israelites.