Printable View
Here it goes:
If Adam and Eve were the only humans living on earth, and they gave birth to Abel and Kane. Thereafter Abel killed Kane. And then it says that he made love to his whife... Who is his whife?? unless he had sex with his mother i dont see who he had his children with please andwer me if u have the answer
the snake maybe
Worst answer EVER
Well there are several takes on this by theologians. I can think of two at the moment:
1) Adam and Eve had many children after Cain and Abel who had long moved out and formed their own communities, it was only Adam and Eve along with their two first born who were allowed to remain in Eden. When Cain was expelled from Eden it was one of his sisters (or perhaps nieces) whom he married.
2) It is contended by some theologians and linguistic experts that the bible never intended to be interpreted as saying that Adam and Eve were the first man and woman. To the contrary it was meant (and the linguistic experts ascertain this is clear in the original greek texts) that Adam and Eve were the first of god's "chosen people." And that the world was not described as "lifeless" prior to their and Eden's creation, but actually as "full of sin." They claim that it was commonly accepted fact in Christianity up until the 900s or so that Adam and Eve were simply the first of god's chosen "tribe" certainly not the first people *ever.*
They further make the argument that it was the Catholic church, modifying the bible for easy consumption by the "ignorant masses" that simply said "Adam and Eve were the first man and the first woman."
I do not have a working knowledge of ancient Greek and have not studied this argument and its counter arguments, but argument number 2 makes the most sense to me personally.
i like the snake one better
how come u know so much about my question? are you the oracle?
I do know everything, but I am not the oracle.
then answer me this question:
If someone is attacked yesterday but dies today what day is he murdered?
the definition of an Oracle is someone or something that knows everything
No answers here...
<pours a glass of wine, some popcorn and grabs a comfy seat and settles to watch this one> :P
that was a very unneccesary answer (has no clue how necessary spells)
and so was that (and this)
Next, on to Topicality . . .
brr it's cold in here <throws another log on fire>
Surely the answer is that the whole story is mythological nonsense?
Or would you rather have the snake thing?
Oooh! another newbie with sense of humour, hi Cara!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cara
yesterday... Though I don't think that the term 'murdered' would actually be used because it wasn't a direct kill...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Jack
I shouldn't find that snake thing funny at all... but i do. oops D
Why yesterday?
And it is a murder if the person dies so the term 'murder' is right.
He made love with whose wife? Abel's? His mother is Adam's wife, he was still alive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Grale
Btw it's Cain that kills Abel.
Well according to my teacher of compared literatures, Adam and Eve had several children, which married among each other cos there were no other people on earth... Incest wasn't a crime then, but a necessity. And that's how the human race developed...
In Byron's Cain, Cain has a wife/sister called Adah, and Abel's one is called Zillah... In other pieces of literature about it they have different names, but the tradition in literature seems to indicate they both had a wife...which wa also their sister...
The Genesis record is HEBREW not Greek. All the genealogies contain only males - except in exceptional circumstances and generally only sons are mentioned by name. Genesis never says that Cain & Abel were the only children, in fact there was at least one more call Seth. The simple answer is that Adam and Eve had other children but according to the Hebrew tradition of the day they are not mentioned. It is suggested that as they were the first man & woman created by God they would have been free from genetic diseases so there were no issues with marriage of close relatives. This was still practised in the time of Abraham who was married to his half sister Sarah.
I suggest you read the Genesis record for more info - even if you don't accept it as a factual record it is a fascinating story.
Holy Grale: Cain killed Abel, not the other way around. It seems like a nit-pick, but I'm sure it mattered to them.
General Bismark: The original is in Hebrew, not Greek, and argument 2 doesn't make any sense textually.
Mini-lecture:
Regardless whether you believe the Bible or any other ancient text, it's easy enough to understand what it says if you take a little time to read it and think about it logically. Remember kids, primary sources are usually superior to secondary sources.
Looking at the text, we can make a summary of the facts:
a) The only people who exist are Adam, Eve, and their descendants (c.f. Genesis 3:20)
b) Adam is, at most, 130 years old when Cain kills Abel (c.f. 4:25 and 5:3).
c) For 130 years, Adam has no entertainment except what he can make himself.
d) Adam lived to be 930 years old (c.f. 5:5), so he probably maintained the virility of a teenager for all of those 130 years (wouldn't that be irritating?).
e) Eve was probably hot, seeing as she, being the "mother of all living", had the genes of every attractive woman that has ever existed (and the hot genes are dominant, of course).
f) Adam was no slouch himself (corollary to e).
g) There are no prophylactics.
Therefore we can assume that:
h) Adam and Eve had a lot of kids in 130 years.
And finally conclude that:
i) Cain married one of his relatives.
As Koa said, incest wouldn't have been against the law since the law hadn't been invented yet. It also wouldn't have been harmful genetically since the genes of each individual would have been very mixed and therefore robust against the problems associated with inbreeding.
I think I probably over-answered your question. Whatever.
And the answer to the question "If someone is attacked yesterday but dies today what day is he murdered?" is: "what are you, a lawyer?"
cheers
Man, you're such an ***.
>>And the answer to the question "If someone is attacked yesterday but dies today what day is he murdered?" is: "what are you, a lawyer?"
Thats not an answer thats just a new question.
But it's still all mythological nonsense, surely?
And anyway, what's new about sleeping with your relatives?
The point is, what else could they do? They were all relatives, born from the same parents, ie Adam and Eve... it's not a matter of law, just there was noone else around... if they had to sleep with someone, it had to be a relative!
Lol I'm so passionate about thsi detail...think about it, no matter if you believe it or not: a world where there is only a family.. ;)
Cara, even if it is just a bunch of mythilogical nonsense, it's still a valid question. Just because the characters is E.M. Forster's A Room With a View never existed doesn't exempt me from having to stay up all night writing an essay thats due tomorow on them. <Yawn>.
Oh yeah, and good call on the languege thing Tam. However, the Septuigent IS in Greek (It was translated circa 100 AD). It was translated for the early christian church. And the way that its translated gives no conformation that Adam WAS the first man ALIVE. Thats where the theory about God's chosen tribe came from. But the original Hebrew should still be the authority.
PS. Tam, is your name taken from Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time? or is it just coincidence?
[/i]
ok... the Bible doesn't list every person who was born. It really is that simple.
Yes, Cain slept with his sister. (waits for childish giggling to stop)
I read the first few posts, and realized the ignorance of the posters and refused to read the rest. Someone may have gotten it right... I am too lazy to see. It is completely unbiblical to say that Adam and Eve were not the first humans and that all humans are direct decendants of them.
lol. u be nice abs.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbdoRinbo
double lol. D thanks fool. but i guess i agree with u about the Bible not naming everyone born.Quote:
Originally Posted by imfoolonthehill
either way, that murder thing? i stand by my previous statement
fayefaye! You're including the Anais Nin Quote! I'm thrilled!
the fool on the hill is back!?!?!?! *waves hi*
www.tmproject.tk
fayefaye- nice gaiman quite :D one of my favorites.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=oracle There's the definition of "oracle" ;) I'm usually not one to nitpick, but you're acting like you yourself know all, apparently without looking things up first.Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Grale
You can see there that the general definition of an oracle is a god, or a person who supposedly has a connection with a god, who gives answers to people, usually involving future events. So it would seem to me that Otto's remark about knowing everything but not being an oracle was both a valid remark, and a bloody sarcastic remark that you were supposed to laugh at and then disregard.
Also, after Adam and Eve were exiled from the Garden of Eden, what was to stop god from making more people? Though I think the two answers otto gave are the most probable, it seems to me that God could have simply created more people, knowing that now humans wouldn't live forever, so they would need to procreate more, and have more genetic diversity.
No, if God had created more people himself, they would have been perfect, as Adam and Eve were before sin. It wouldn't have been fair for God to create people and not give them the same oppertunity that he gave Adam and Eve to live forever in perfect harmony. The other people, the ones that procreated with Cain and Seth were created by Adam and Eve gettin' down. And as has been previously stated, that far back ago they wouldn't have had to worry about genetic desieses. Marriage within family was common practice even in Abraham's time (Approx 1900 years later). Genetic desises from interfamily procreation have only been discovered in the past 600 years.
I see your point, and it's a good one, but one should also keep in mind that the God of the Old Testament wasn't what we could consider to be a completely fair god. True, he gave the Hebrews the idea of "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" which is in essence fair. But it wasn't a kind, compassionate fair like we think of today. It was a cold, harsh, scales o' justice kind of fair.Quote:
Originally Posted by IWilKikU
Perhaps, by his reasoning, if Man had already tasted the fruit once, man would just do it again, so why waste time? Might as well just hurry up and populate the world to prepare it for the coming of his Son. Or maybe he did give several other couples the chance after Adam and Eve, and they all made the same mistake. Perhaps those couples just aren't mentioned because the Hebrews were directly descended from Adam & Eve's children?
I just think it's kind of strange for them to mention Cain & Abel (their oldest) and then Seth (who was born many years later, I believe, and was probably the youngest) and yet none of the ones who were born in between. Of course, it would also be odd for them to only have add three children. Genesis is really just rather odd.
It hadta be a relaive... people were incestuous at the time....
and they had no other choice... it wasn't wrong.
Not so. The God of the OT is the same God from the NT, and the same God that exists today. The way God behaves can only be related through the OT authors' understanding of God. If September 11 had been recorded by an OT author it might go somthing like this,Quote:
I see your point, and it's a good one, but one should also keep in mind that the God of the Old Testament wasn't what we could consider to be a completely fair god. True, he gave the Hebrews the idea of "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" which is in essence fair. But it wasn't a kind, compassionate fair like we think of today. It was a cold, harsh, scales o' justice kind of fair.
And in the first year of the reign of George Bush, son of George Bush, son of George Bush, it came to pass that his daughters were caught drinking underage. They were found to be, in thy mercy, the bearers of false identification cards. So The Lord, in his wrath, finding The United States to be evil in his sight, sent 3 fully fueled jets to be the harbingers of doom upon the major economic strongholds within thy realm.
See what I'm saying? The authors thought of God as vengeful. Any catastrophe, from earthquakes to catching a cold, had to be the result of a sin. This wasn't necesarily so. Sometimes bad things just happen. God wasn't sitting up in heaven with his lightning bolts waiting for some one to do somthing smiteworthy.
God is unfair, was the basis for the war in heaven and the split of the angelic host. If you really believe that God was unfair, you've been duped by the father of lies. God is always fair. Life is not.
I'm sorry, I thought Kane killed Abel.
Parthenogenesis.