jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (27 posts)

Noah, His Family, And Incest

  1. Link10103 profile image80
    Link10103posted 2 years ago

    So it is my understanding that when the flood supposedly occurred, all of humanity was wiped out aside from noah, his family, and the animals aboard the ark. If that isnt the case, feel free to correct me.

    But for the sake of this post however, assume that it is correct. I have asked a few christians in the past how the earth was repopulated if only noah and his family were left after the flood (http://lybrah.hubpages.com/question/247 … ir-beliefs). One of the recent responses in the comments of a Q&A was to laugh at me and say that it was obvious Noah and his family were the ones to repopulate the earth.

    ...does that not mean we are all the result of incest then? I bring this up and suddenly its a huge stretch of the imagination. Somehow noah's sons being married before they boarded the ark explains away how their kids, who had no one to mate with but each other, repopulated the earth.

    I found the lack of critical thinking to be interesting, as well as the fact that the point of incest was completely shoved aside and i had a bible verse thrown at me, so i made a forum post so there is more room.

    Assuming the flood occured and wiped out all of humanity, was the earth not repopulated through the incest between members of Noahs family?

    1. Say Yes To Life profile image84
      Say Yes To Lifeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Yes it was.  In fact, the world was also populated by incest before the flood.  The sons and daughters of Adam and Eve married each other, since no one else was around.  I was told the human race was purer then, so you didn't get the genetic defects you would if you did that now.

      According to the Bible, Japheth was the forefather of the Europeans, Ham the forefather of Africans, and Shem the forefather of Arabs, including the Jews.  Here are some links:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sons_of_Noah

      https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s … ersion=KJV

      Much has been made of people changing their skin color due to their environment, but that doesn't explain facial features.

      I can no longer believe all humans came from 2 parents.  I can no longer believe the flood story either, because how can so many animals, plus their feed, fit into one big boat?  The story was created because you can find sea shells on mountaintops - but there's more than one way they could have gotten there.  Perhaps the mountains were pushed up by earthquakes, or through volcanoes?

      1. Paul Wingert profile image79
        Paul Wingertposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Let's see, while the flood was wiping out innocent men, women,children, and even pregnant women (so much for a loving god), the pyramids in Egypt were being built along with Stone Henge, and people were settling in the far east. Non of these cultures ever heard of a world wide flood! Then comes along DNA that says without a shadow of a doubt that modern humans are 2-3% Neanderthal (unless you are 100% African) and no way, shape or form originated from a single parent. So much for the cute Biblical creation story that was ripped off from the much earlier Euridu Genesis story. Okay, now let's hear the weak excuses from the people that think that the Bible is literally true!

        1. 0
          Lybrahposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Actually, many biblical scholars say that it was not a "world wide flood."  They argue since the bible is very "middle-East based", the flood only struck that area.  The world, according to Noah, would have been that region.  So why did God tell Noah to take two of any animal on board?  Perhaps to make a serious point. 

          This is just one angle, no one can know because none of us were there!

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            I take it that you do not understand the bible as being the word of god, but merely the words of men; men prone to errors, exaggerations and outright lies?

            1. Link10103 profile image80
              Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              She believes the bible is 100% accurate and that historians everywhere consult it for history.

              At least, that is what she told me before. Quite a few times actually.

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Half the states in the country allow first cousin marriage; wouldn't that be what you are talking about?

      A much bigger problem would be what to eat, after every living thing on earth or the seas was killed, all topsoil was washed into the ocean basins and even seeds were ruined after months under miles of water.  There is also the problem of the "nuclear winter" that that much cloud cover and rainfall would produce.  The small matter of legal incest is the smallest of their problems.

      1. Link10103 profile image80
        Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Come on now, you should know better than to dig that deep into such matters when critisizing bible stories.

        Baby steps...first, the admittance of global incest, next, nuclear winter.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Maybe that's the answer; as the incest was not global, but confined to a square mile of the earth and lasted only one generation (we hope!) it was OK to do.

  2. Dale Hyde profile image86
    Dale Hydeposted 2 years ago

    If one is to follow the Christian creation theory of Adam and Eve, we are all bred of incestious relationships siimply because there were only two parents for all of mankind.

    1. DzyMsLizzy profile image90
      DzyMsLizzyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I've been saying that for years, now, Dale!

      1. Dale Hyde profile image86
        Dale Hydeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        smile

        1. Paul Wingert profile image79
          Paul Wingertposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Creation is no way a theory, it's a cute BS story that entertains kids that can be easily debunked by DNA. There's no facts to back it up, it can't be tested, and it doesn't work - so much for being a theory. Creation is a rip off from a much earlier Sumerian creation story called the Euridu Genesis and it appears in The Epic of Gilgamesh.

    2. Link10103 profile image80
      Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Oh i know, i made that connection randomly years ago before i ever gave thought to what my religious viewpoint was.

      I think noah was somewhat related to whatever topic that was initially being talked about, which is why i went with it at the time

  3. Sed-me profile image84
    Sed-meposted 2 years ago

    You know incest was not a thing until it became a thing.
    Once it was established as wrong, it became wrong.

    Ok, so... the land of Nod. Did God create other ppl in this land? We don't know, it wasn't recorded. Were they simply offspring of the descendants of Adam and Eve? Just as plausible. Either way, God did not set up the laws of protocol concerning familial, sexual relations until Lev. 18. So before that, it was not "icky." It simply was.

    Kind of like bugs... I wouldn't eat one, but if I lived in another country where food was scarce, I would be feeding them to my kids.

    We always judge the things we don't understand, but sometimes we just need to spend a little time considering those things with a broader perspective. We cannot judge the past by present standards. It makes no sense at all.

    1. Righteous Atheist profile image59
      Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Speaking of things you don't understand. wink Incest has always produced non-viable offspring. Nothing to do with right or wrong. sad

      These the same kids you would let starve to death rather than steal to feed them? wink

      1. Sed-me profile image84
        Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Maybe that's why God put a stop to it, eh?

        As far as that second statement you made... you are possibly confusing me with another Christian that you detest b/c I've never had that conversation with you and have no idea what you're talking about. Lo siento, mi amigo. smile

        1. Righteous Atheist profile image59
          Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          No - if the Noah's story ark was true the human race would have died out by then. Sure you understand this? wink

          Yes - sorry - it was one of the other female preachers. My mistake. I am glad you would steal to feed yours if you needed to.

          1. Sed-me profile image84
            Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            So damned if I did (the thing I don't know what your talking about) and damned if I didn't do (the thing you were talking about.) Sounds like a set up to me.

            So why don't you answer your own question and that way I'll know what the "right" answer is... or are you in the habit of proposing questions for the sole purpose of condemning others by your personal rulebook? Seems to me that ppl like that would start a lot of wars.

            1. Righteous Atheist profile image59
              Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Oh - it is pretty simple - would you steal to feed your children if you had to? Yes or no?

              Great job on avoiding what we we talking about though. Speaking of not understanding basic genetics. wink

              1. Sed-me profile image84
                Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I am done here.

                1. Righteous Atheist profile image59
                  Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Oh - I thought you wanted to understand and answer the question without me "condemning others by your personal rulebook." Not so? Sorry I explained for you. Must be frustrating when the facts contradict your beliefs.

        2. Link10103 profile image80
          Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Except that god already knew it would cause genetic problems, cause he be god. Unless he didnt know, which would mean he be god, just not all knowing.

          And you say put a stop to it as if people still dont do it. Its even legal to do with cousins in US states, which is astounding since supposedly the US is christian nation.

          1. Sed-me profile image84
            Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            he was establishing a law so that they would not continue to do what they were doing. We do not know the direct results of those actions then... could they be compared to now? We don't know. If there were genetic issues, did they surface at the same rate or did they take generations to surface? We don't know. We know very little. What we do know, is we cannot judge ancient history by today's standards. We can't even judge AIDS the same way we did in the 80s. Things change, we know diddly.

            1. Link10103 profile image80
              Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              So we cant judge something that happened 3 decades ago by the standards we have today...yet you dont find any problem taking principles from a book that was written millenia ago?

              I feel like i missed your logic somewhere down the line.

              1. Sed-me profile image84
                Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                These are words games... You create a "set up" with the words Ive said, but leave my meaning behind. I don't like to engage in these games, but I'll leave you with this.

                I will always base my faith upon the word of God. He is infallible, His word is infallible. I build my beliefs upon His precepts... upon His teachings regarding sin, righteousness, life and death. What you are referring to is a medical concept that is based on a practice that is now outlawed, by God and man. You are bringing two seperate arguments into the same conversation. Regarding the subject of this thread...there are so many variables that we do not understand, it's astounding.

                Let's look at one possibility.
                God created man, allowed man to procreate, to the point where it was perfectly healthy and there were no biological issues as a result. He (being God, the creator of all things, the ultimate scientist) knew exactly the point where it was time to tell mankind to procreate from outside of his extended family and find a spouse more distant. In the long run though, we are all related, we have all come from Adam and Eve, there is not some string of DNA out there that has not come from the first DNA.

                1. Link10103 profile image80
                  Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  There is no game, i read what you said, took it at face value, and then clarified how i understood to see if you meant something else.

                  What two unrelated arguements did i introduce? You are the one who brought up how we cannot judge the past by todays standards, directly after talking about how god set the law in the bible millenia ago.

                  If you are done, then you are done, but please take some responsibility for your words next time, rather than try to pin the blame on me for addressing what you yourself said.

 
working