God has created only two human beings. Then how come the next generation came in

1. 61

   Kevin Peterposted 11 years ago

   God has created only two human beings. Then how come the next generation came into existance?
   
   Adam and Eve were the two human beings. They had only two children. Both were males. Who did they marry to form the next generation of human beings?
   
   

   replyreport
2. 62

   caponposted 11 years ago

   Hello Kevin. May I ask where it is that you are getting your information from? ("They had only two children. Both were males.")
   Maybe you are reffering to the two first born, Cain and Able?
   Tony

   replyreport
3. 0

   Lybrahposted 11 years ago

   Some theologists suggest that there were other humans on the planet when God created Adam and Eve.  They just were not in the garden of Eden.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      yep 'some' theologists and ALL scientists

      replyreport
4. 71

   stanwshuraposted 11 years ago

   Full disclosure here:  I do not believe the Adam and Eve story.  That would have to have been a very incestuous beginning to humanity.  I dismiss much of the Bible, and all dogmatic religion for the same reason.  I am an agnostic.  Only evolution can explain the ways of the earth, including the development of mankind.

   replyreport
   1. 62

      caponposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Are you not treating the theory of evolution (as opposed to the law of evolution) as "Gospel?"

      replyreport
   2. 71

      stanwshuraposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      No.  I am not worshipping it.  It's the best explanation science has come up with so far.  If research, experiments, and peer- and publically-scrutinized analytical work and evidence points elsewhere, then that shall be what I trust as the truth.

      replyreport
   3. 62

      caponposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Hello Stanwshura, let me agree with you that evolution [in its various versions] is the best explanation science has come up with so far, but I would add, that doesn't involve God. Why do you think there is not 1 theory of evolution?

      replyreport
   4. 61

      cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      that's the point - evolution explains it all without the need of any god
      
      like all scientific theories there continue to be changes as new information is available - something that cant be said for the bible which is still selling the same fairy tale

      replyreport
   5. 62

      caponposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Hello Cascoly, I agree "evolution explains it all without the need of any god." But for that reason alone does it prove it is true?
      Scientific theories, if correct, become "The law of ..............." They don't continually evolve. Do they? Tony

      replyreport
   6. 61

      cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      actually evolution already IS as solid a law as gravity or Newton 's-- but like those, new discoveries chamge things - such as Einstein's theories of relativity, even if evolution were false, the bible still wouldn't be a valid explanation

      replyreport
   7. 62

      caponposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Hello Cascoly, Can you tell me which particular theory of evolution you you refer too when you say "evolution already IS as solid a law"? I do hope its the hopeful monster theory! PS you have me wrong if you think I do not believe in some evolution.

      replyreport
   8. 61

      cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      LAW of evolution -- The change in genetic composition of a population over successive generations, which may be caused by natural selection and mutation.

      replyreport
   9. 62

      caponposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Hello Cascoly. Am I missing something? I'm well aware that there are something like 13 theories of evolution, but as far as I know there is no Law of evolution.

      replyreport
   10. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       yep, you're definitely missing something.....

       replyreport
   11. 72

       LoisRyan13903posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I don't believe in evolution

       replyreport
   12. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       that's nice, but what does it add to the discussion?

       replyreport
5. 53

   celafoeposted 11 years ago

   i assume this is a trick question.  since it is not asking a truthful question . The bible first tells about two sons, then later about the third son and then in chapter5 verse  4 of genesis it tells about his other sons and daughters, which is where the sons wives came from.   There was no problem in that because of the purity of the race at that time.   So the answer is they married their sisters.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      sorry, inbreeding is inbreeding, no matter how 'pure' it starts out and there would be consequences.  this is just a pseudo scientific way to try to get around the basic absurdity  of the 2 person creation myth

      replyreport
   2. 53

      celafoeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      cascoly--- to a heathen yes , to a Christian , not so.  we know God can do whatever He wishes

      replyreport
   3. 61

      cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      heathens? MOST Christians have no problem realizing the bible is not to be taken literally - it's just the fundamentalists who cant think beyond the book

      replyreport
   4. 72

      LoisRyan13903posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Can you prove this is a myth?

      replyreport
   5. 61

      cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      it's not up to me -- you and your friends made the false claim that the bible is literally true - it's up to you to provide some actual evidence that the bible fairy tale is true.  just quoting the bible over & over doesn't make it true

      replyreport
6. 58

   taburkettposted 11 years ago

   they married the women who were also created for them.
   as a test of God's presence, you can dig a hole in a healthy vacant lot.
   a healthy lot is one that holds water when it rains.
   dig your hole big enough that it will fill and hold water after it rains even when the sun comes out.
   in less than 2 months, you will see tadpoles swimming there.
   in less than 2 years, you will see fish swimming there.
   then you can ask - where did those things come from.........

   replyreport
   1. 53

      celafoeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      there were no women created for them, there were woman produced by their parents (sisters) that they married.  The tadpoles come from frogs with legs that walked to the water and laid their eggs.   What a crazy attempted analogy you gave.

      replyreport
   2. 38

      Borsiaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Unless there are eggs brought in from somewhere all you will have is water.
      Tadpoles and fish don't just appear out of thin air.
      Don't believe me? Start with  sterilized ground and cover the water, nothing will appear. Biology 101.

      replyreport
7. 57

   Isa28posted 11 years ago

   Not only that, but after Cain murders his brother the next verse says he goes over the hill and marries into another tribe!

   replyreport
   1. 72

      Insightful Tigerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, Genesis 4:16,17 says that he moved east, laid with his wife, and started a city named "Enoch" after his son. That wife could have been his sister.

      replyreport
   2. 72

      LoisRyan13903posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It does not really say how old Cain was when this happened.  So Adam and Eve may have had many daughters before Seth was born.

      replyreport
8. 0

   Copper Manposted 11 years ago

   What ever happened to Seth?  Adam and Eve's third-born went on to have many offsprings and great-offsprings. Marriage, as we know it, didn't happen. Seth came along when Adam was over a hundred years old. Adam continued to father boys and girls for another several hundred years. If all humankind stem from Adam and Eve, then some pretty close mating must have occurred. The problems now associated with incestual relationships likely did not crop up in the less contaminated gene pool of the day.

   replyreport
9. 0

   KEPitzposted 11 years ago

   Just saw an interesting documentary about the Bible mysteries explained. There were other tribes of humans on the planet at the time. The Bible only addresses Adam and Eve - who were in the Garden of Eden - separate from the other tribes. I think I also heard something about Cain actually being another woman's son with Adam - not Eve's.
   I've got a lot of ideas, opinions and theories about this subject, and tend to be a bit overly enthusiastic when expressing them - so I won't start into my rant here. (Ya all dodged a bullet, there!)
   

   replyreport
   1. 53

      celafoeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      you definatey read a "story", a fable.  Not a scriptural or historical document.

      replyreport
   2. 72

      LoisRyan13903posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Was this other woman mentioned in the Bible?

      replyreport
10. 72

    Insightful Tigerposted 11 years ago

    I'm trying to submit a hub that answers this question, but while the "duplicate" alert is being investigated...
    the short answer is this:
    Adam had other sons and daughters. Cain, just like his brothers, probably lived until he was around 900 years old. In that time he probably married a sister or niece, because the human genome was probably devoid of birth defects to choose from.
    Look at chapter 5 in Genesis and the answer is there.
    hope this helps.

    replyreport
    1. 57

       Isa28posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       And you actually believe this!

       replyreport
    2. 72

       Insightful Tigerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Believe what I am saying? Or believe that the Bible is inspired by God? Or believe that the Bible is accurate? Can you be more specific?

       replyreport
    3. 72

       LoisRyan13903posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I do do you have a problem with it?  I don't have a problem if you do not believe?

       replyreport
11. 60

    Disappearingheadposted 11 years ago

    First of all you are assuming that the A&E story is a true reportage account. However studies of mitochondrial DNA taken from people all over the shows our ancestors came out of Africa some 100,000-ish years ago. However it is believed that we all descend from a single female. All except for the other indigenous people's who remained in Africa.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       and the Eve hypothesis does not mean there was only one woman at that time, just that current humans are descended from 1 woman - big difference - see http://cascoly.hubpages.com/hub/Adam-an … Love-Story

       replyreport
    2. 60

       Disappearingheadposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Agreed cascoly, but then I never actually said there was only on woman in existence at the time.

       replyreport
    3. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       right - I understood you weren't making that claim -- but creationists do cherry pick evidence and misrepresent the eve hypothesis as proof of the adam & eve story

       replyreport
    4. 60

       Disappearingheadposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I'm not a creationist.

       replyreport
12. 71

    JasonLicerioPHposted 11 years ago

    It was said that they were the FIRST people God made. Maybe God made other people after the two.

    replyreport
13. 70

    nasser deepposted 11 years ago

    Eve gave birth to a boy and a girl on every pregnancy . Then a boy from pregnancy number 1 married a daughter from pregnancy number 2 and vice-versa. Yes they were brothers and sisters, but that was the possible solution to prevent a boy marrying his twin sister.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       CalebSparksposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Very interesting solution. Too bad there's not a snit of evidence to back it up...interesting none the less.

       replyreport
14. 74

    PlanksandNailsposted 11 years ago

    According to the Bible, Adam and Eve had more than two children.
    
    And the days of Adam after he had begotten SETH were eight hundred years: and he begat SONS AND DAUGHTERS: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. - Genesis 5:4
    
    By having sons and daughters, the brothers would have to marry sisters; otherwise, there would be no future generations.

    replyreport
15. 0

    Emile Rposted 11 years ago

    Let's assume the biblical story of creation is rooted in some type of historical fact. Let's assume there is a God who was driving the forces of the beginning of Mankind.  The story references Man in two ways. First, God made man and woman and directed them to be fruitful and multiply. Then, it bounces into another chapter with the story of Adam and Eve. So, from that angle, there were more than two humans to get the population ball rolling.
    
    Even if you take the bizarre miracle of the sudden arrival of everything onto the planet out of the mix; the story still has a point, from a religious angle. Man was actively populating the earth when a line of humanity was selected to become aware of a greater reality. Adam and Eve represent little more than the beginning of the ancestors of the Abrahamic line.
    
    I honestly don't think the story was first intended to pretend that Adam and Eve were the first and only people. I think the story tellers wanted to explain to the listener what made their particular ethnic group special.

    replyreport
    1. 53

       celafoeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       what you think does not matter, what God says is the truth

       replyreport
    2. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       yep god forbid we actually THINK about the fairy tales we're told as children

       replyreport
    3. 60

       Disappearingheadposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Celafoe dear celafoe, what you are saying is that what you interpret from the bible is God's truth and nobody should think anything different. This is how the Church persecuted dissidents.

       replyreport
    4. 0

       Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       celafoe, you must remember it isn't what God said. It's what you were taught to believe God said. The two are not the same. Pretending God said something silly makes your idea of God look silly.

       replyreport
16. 71

    Freeway Flyerposted 11 years ago

    Incest was the only option I assume (if you take Genesis literally). The results of this inbreeding may say a lot about the general intelligence level of the human race, with the fact that  many people take Genesis literally an excellent example.

    replyreport
    1. 72

       LoisRyan13903posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Abraham later on in Genesis married his half-sister Sarah.  I think it was same father, different mother

       replyreport
17. 60

    relawsheposted 11 years ago

    Just like Insightful Tiger, I too believe that Adam & Eve had MANY other children (obviously they would've had to have many children if their offspring would grow to populate the entire earth!)  And they lived hundreds of years, and their genetic material was not corrupted like ours is nowadays, and it's believed by proponents of this view that their genetic material contained everything that would eventually lead to various skin colors and physical traits.  And as people began to spread out across the earth, their bodies which held all of these genetic possibilities, began to adapt to their new environments. 
    
    "After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters."--Genesis 5:4
    "Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living."--Genesis 3:20

    replyreport
    1. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       'believed' id the key word -- there's no EVIDENCE for that idea and it's scientifically absurd, countered by biological FACT;

       replyreport
    2. 72

       LoisRyan13903posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       And there is not evidence that you are correct

       replyreport
    3. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       ignorance of reality aka science is no excuse -- the bible is not a scientific document aND IS RIDDLED WITH FACTUAL ERRORS

       replyreport
18. 80

    bethperryposted 11 years ago

    Not that I profess to hold Christian/Jewish beliefs, but according to several ancient Hebrew doctrines, Lilith was Adam's first wife. If so, I would see where A&E's children could find mates outside their direct sibling pool. These children of A&E could even have taken these mates without the incest factor, as Lilith was known to have more lovers than just Adam.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       that begs the question -- where did Lilith's OTHER lovers come from?

       replyreport
    2. 80

       bethperryposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I believe Lilith was a Hebrew representation for the earth mother, and as such maligned to begin with by their interpretation of Her. But yeah, it'd be interesting to know the answer to that, if just to satisfy the curiosity.

       replyreport
    3. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       well, if Lilith was the earth mother, then adam was the first to commit the sin of onan

       replyreport
    4. 72

       LoisRyan13903posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Is Lilith mentioned in the Bible?

       replyreport
    5. 51

       abt79posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       nope. where this person got that idea i dont know

       replyreport
    6. 60

       anancelesteposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Like Beth mentioned, this character appears in other Jewish scripture. The Legend goes that... you know what... this could be an interesting hub to educate those that don't know Lilith's story.

       replyreport
19. 48

    smith143posted 11 years ago

    Good question. Something to be thought seriously. How could brothers and sisters marry each other? Maybe it was not a problem in the past.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       genetics hasn't changed - if they committed incest, the population that resulted would have the same genetic problems we see today with inbred popultaions

       replyreport
20. 69

    WalterPoonposted 11 years ago

    Let's forget about Adam and Eve for the moment and talk about the Great Flood. Who were on that Ark? Only Noah, his wife, his 3 sons and 3 wives... except for these 8 people, every other person died... a second round of incest.
    
    "And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
    
    According to Wikipedia, there are presently some 5 million species of both plants and animals. Where do these come from, given that they did not survive the Great Flood? Was there a Second Genesis?

    replyreport
    1. 61

       cascolyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       simple answer is there was no great flood - it's yet another fairy tale from the bible

       replyreport
    2. 69

       WalterPoonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Cascoly, you are right. Wikipedia calls the Great Flood, a myth: "It has been postulated that the deluge myth may be based on a sudden rise in sea levels, caused by the rapid draining of Lake Agassiz, at the end of the last Ice Age, 8,400 years ago.

       replyreport
    3. 38

       Borsiaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Consider this, given the number of species at that time, if you loaded 1 every 5 seconds it would have taken something like 35 years.
       There was 1 pair of each, what did the predators eat after the flood, most must eat their own weight every 60 day.

       replyreport
21. 58

    Acemeposted 11 years ago

    Funny pic and funny question. Yes. i agree Freeway Flyer said:Incest was the only option I assume (if you take Genesis literally). The results of this inbreeding may say a lot about the general intelligence level of the human race, with the fact that many people take Genesis literally an excellent example.

    replyreport
22. 38

    Borsiaposted 11 years ago

    Just another silly bible myth with no grounds for reality.
    Likewise after Noah's great flood there weren't enough breeders in any species to have genetic strength enough not to have died out soon after. Of course that is probably the weakest fallacy in the whole great flood thing but it is one none the less.

    replyreport
23. 47

    ythghgh555posted 11 years ago

    back in the old days two gay dudes could make babies.  Then somewhere down the line that part got edited out of the bible.

    replyreport
    1. 51

       abt79posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       haha very funny.

       replyreport
24. 70

    Man of Strengthposted 11 years ago

    There had to be incest amongst the siblings . Also if we all came from Adam & Eve, aren't we all related, being they're the matriarch & patriarch of the world's family tree?

    replyreport
    1. 51

       abt79posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       actual, it was said that cain moved to the city of Nod (wherever that is and how it came to exist, i don't know) and married a woman.

       replyreport
    2. 60

       WLeonard59posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       (Leviticus 18:7-17).God forbade intermarriage at the time of Moses to protect the increasing chance of a deformed offspring resulting from such a union. The health of the nation Israel and strength of the family unit was insured by this commandment.

       replyreport
25. 51

    abt79posted 11 years ago

    Cain, Adam, and Eve are supposedly the only people on Earth. Suddenly:
    Gen 4:17-"Cain had relations with his wife and she conceived"
    THE GENESIS STORY IS NOT LITERAL

    replyreport
    1. 38

       Borsiaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       nor is anything else in the bible, so why base a faith on the bible rather than say Grimm's fairy tales?

       replyreport
26. 0

    Deborah Sextonposted 11 years ago

    In Hebrew Adam was Adam Kadmon which means mankind in bodies not one man. God created humans not a human. It is a mistranslation

    replyreport
27. 49

    erorantesposted 11 years ago

    Love did it. The Love that one felt to the other person.With out thinking about the  children . They were aout to have. It was the creator's plan to have people. Good and bad people. Since then, we had so many good things happening to the world. From inventions to battles  men has being creating good things for the world and had destroyed too. Men found the cure for a lot of sick people too.

    replyreport
28. 58

    Martin-ddpposted 11 years ago

    The Next Generation Came because the first Boldly went were no man ever went before. And than came deep space nine (Most likely no one ever gets my jokes so I will have to mention Star Trek and if you still don't get it. Than its just a very bad joke)

    replyreport
29. 77

    Claudia Marieposted 11 years ago

    All humans are the offspring of Adam an Eve. Gen 3:20.  Adam and Eve had sons and daughters Gen 5:4. Adams sons and daughters married each other. At that time in human history, humans had outstanding physical health and vitality, as indicated by the length of their lives, Adam was one hundred thirty years old when  he fathered his third son, Adam died at the age of nine hundred and thirty years old Gen 5:3, 5  therefore, the passing on defects as a result of marrying a close relative was not a problem. Two thousand, five hundred years later mankind's physical condition deteriorated, and God gave laws to Israel forbidding incest.

    replyreport
    1. 38

       Borsiaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       How would their respective ages alter the gene pool?
       You are still breeding everyone from the original 2 and genetic defects would  still multiply over time.
       Look at what happened to the royals of Europe.

       replyreport
    2. 77

       Claudia Marieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       We do not fully understand genetics, near perfect genes would have a different results.

       replyreport