Inbreeding's Beginning

[Webers_Home]

.
When Inbreeding Was Safe

• Gen 2:21a-22a . . So the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon the man; and,
while he slept, He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that spot.
And the Lord God fashioned the rib that He had taken from the man into a
woman;

The Hebrew word translated "rib" is tsela' (tsay-law') and Gen 2:21-22
contains the only two places in the entire Old Testament where it's
translated with an English word representing a skeletal bone.

In the other twenty-nine places, it's translated "side" which is really how
tsela' should be translated because according to Gen 2:23, the material
taken from Adam's body included some of his flesh; and seeing as how the
life of the flesh is in the blood (Lev 17:11) then I think it's safe to assume
that the flesh that God took from Adam's body to construct the woman
contained some of his blood too so that the flesh was living flesh instead of
dead.

In other words: we can accept "rib" if we allow it a description similar to a
barbecued rib; a serving that contains not bone alone rather, bone, blood,
and meat.

The most important thing to note in Gen 2:21a-22a is that Eve wasn't
created directly from the soil as Adam was, viz: Eve wasn't a discreet
creation, i.e. her gender isn't a unique specie.

Being as Eve was constructed with Adam's flesh, blood, and bones, then the
flesh, blood, and bones of her body were reproductions of his flesh, blood,
and bones with the result that Eve came into the world biologically related to
Adam, i.e. he was her father and she was his first child; so any discussion of
incest has to go all the way back to the very beginning and start with the
first couple instead of Cain and/or Seth.
_

 

[Webers_Home]

.
It could be argued that Eve was Adam's sister; but neither she nor he were
produced by a common biological ancestor; rather, he was constructed from
dirt and she was constructed from Adam. That makes Eve his descendant
rather than his sibling.

It had to be that way because God wanted all human life to biologically
descend from just one source.

• Acts 17:26 . . From one man he made every nation of men

[ Every nation of men includes Pygmies, Inuit, Hispanic, African, Native
American, Germanic, Semitic, Polynesian, Aboriginal, Asian, etc. etc. ]

The inescapable conclusion to draw from God's decision is that Adam had to
sleep with his daughter to produce Cain, Abel, and Seth because there just
weren't any other women in his world at the time. And besides: it was God
brought them together, viz: they were genuinely a match made in Heaven.
_

 

[TLHKAJ]

Adam, i.e. he was her father and she was his first child;

You're drawing a conclusion that is never stated in scripture. Adam is never called Eve's father.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Another biblical case of @home incest takes place in Genesis 19:30-38
where the two surviving daughters of Abraham's nephew Lot got their dad
drunk, and themselves knocked up.

The girls weren't motivated by naughty passions (though considering where
they grew up it wouldn't be surprising). They were honestly concerned about
one-- or possibly both --of two things: they'd either finish out their lives as
childless old maids or their father's family tree would terminate with him.

Anyway, long story short, the eldest girl became preggers with a baby boy
that she named Moab. From that little guy eventually came the very famous
woman named Ruth-- herself destined to become one of David's distant
grandmothers via her son Obed.
_

 

[Webers_Home]

.

Ruth-- herself destined to become one of David's distant grandmothers via
her son Obed.

David is a key player in Christ's biological genealogy.

• Rev 22:16 . . I am the offspring of David

The Greek word translated "offspring" is genos (ghen'-os) which basically
refers to kin, viz: one's relatives.

Christ's kinship with David is quite a bit more specific in Rom 1:1-3 where it
says:

"Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to
the flesh"

The Greek word translated "seed" in that passage is sperma (sper'-mah)
which is a bit ambiguous because it can refer to spiritual progeny as well as
to biological progeny; for example:

• Gal 3:29 . . If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed.

That seed is obviously spiritual progeny; whereas David's is biological
because it's "according to the flesh" i.e. his physical human body.

So then, Jesus' flesh is David and Bathsheba's flesh, and David's flesh in
turn is Boaz and Ruth's flesh, and Boaz's flesh in turn is Adam and Eve's
flesh.

It's all pretty interesting when considering that Jesus' flesh is the result of
two of the most famous cases of incest on record-- Adam and Eve, and Lot
and his eldest daughter. But that was back when incest was much safer than
it is now.
_

 

[quietthinker]

The inescapable conclusion to draw from God's decision is that Adam had to
sleep with his daughter to produce Cain, Abel, and Seth because there just
weren't any other women in his world at the time. And besides: it was God
brought them together, viz: they were genuinely a match made in Heaven.

this is muddled

 

[Heart2Soul]

.
When Inbreeding Was Safe

• Gen 2:21a-22a . . So the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon the man; and,
while he slept, He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that spot.
And the Lord God fashioned the rib that He had taken from the man into a
woman;

The Hebrew word translated "rib" is tsela' (tsay-law') and Gen 2:21-22
contains the only two places in the entire Old Testament where it's
translated with an English word representing a skeletal bone.

In the other twenty-nine places, it's translated "side" which is really how
tsela' should be translated because according to Gen 2:23, the material
taken from Adam's body included some of his flesh; and seeing as how the
life of the flesh is in the blood (Lev 17:11) then I think it's safe to assume
that the flesh that God took from Adam's body to construct the woman
contained some of his blood too so that the flesh was living flesh instead of
dead.

In other words: we can accept "rib" if we allow it a description similar to a
barbecued rib; a serving that contains not bone alone rather, bone, blood,
and meat.

The most important thing to note in Gen 2:21a-22a is that Eve wasn't
created directly from the soil as Adam was, viz: Eve wasn't a discreet
creation, i.e. her gender isn't a unique specie.

Being as Eve was constructed with Adam's flesh, blood, and bones, then the
flesh, blood, and bones of her body were reproductions of his flesh, blood,
and bones with the result that Eve came into the world biologically related to
Adam, i.e. he was her father and she was his first child; so any discussion of
incest has to go all the way back to the very beginning and start with the
first couple instead of Cain and/or Seth.
_

It wasn't called incest until God ceased marrying family members. Pre-law vs Post-law.
Abraham married his half-sister Sarah and to this day is considered the Father of Many Nations...and a Righteous man before God.

 

[Heart2Soul]

.
It could be argued that Eve was Adam's sister; but neither she nor he were
produced by a common biological ancestor; rather, he was constructed from
dirt and she was constructed from Adam. That makes Eve his descendant
rather than his sibling.

It had to be that way because God wanted all human life to biologically
descend from just one source.

• Acts 17:26 . . From one man he made every nation of men

[ Every nation of men includes Pygmies, Inuit, Hispanic, African, Native
American, Germanic, Semitic, Polynesian, Aboriginal, Asian, etc. etc. ]

The inescapable conclusion to draw from God's decision is that Adam had to
sleep with his daughter to produce Cain, Abel, and Seth because there just
weren't any other women in his world at the time. And besides: it was God
brought them together, viz: they were genuinely a match made in Heaven.
_

It might be considered that the genetic code was flawless at that time....what about the fallen angels who came and bred with the daughters of man?
It doesn't mention whether the offspring married and reproduced...but I suppose they did.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Having the same DNA as his wife was not incest because being genetically related had no unwanted consequences.
Cain would have married one of his sisters or nieces. (Genesis 5:4-5) Since daughters were often not named in scripture, we have no idea if the daughters of Adam were interspersed with the sons.

The gene pool as it was back then, was much closer to the perfection that Adam and his wife enjoyed. The first death was by murder, not from any genetic disorder.
The Bible's characters often married their own kin.....it was often an expectation.

Nowadays its a whole different story.....the gene pool is now a cess pool and all manner of horrible genetically transmitted abnormalities are common. God's law prohibited sexual relation between blood relatives apparently when the gene pool could no longer tolerate it.

Lots daughters were not wayward women but because of being isolated in the mountains after the destruction of Sodom, with no blood kin close by, they got themselves pregnant by their father (after getting him drunk) so as to preserve his family line. It was done with the noblest of intent.

 

[Heart2Soul]

Having the same DNA as his wife was not incest because being genetically related had no unwanted consequences.
Cain would have married one of his sisters or nieces. (Genesis 5:4-5) Since daughters were often not named in scripture, we have no idea if the daughters of Adam were interspersed with the sons.

The gene pool as it was back then, was much closer to the perfection that Adam and his wife enjoyed. The first death was by murder, not from any genetic disorder.
The Bible's characters often married their own kin.....it was often an expectation.

Nowadays its a whole different story.....the gene pool is now a cess pool and all manner of horrible genetically transmitted abnormalities are common. God's law prohibited sexual relation between blood relatives apparently when the gene pool could no longer tolerate it.

Lots daughters were not wayward women but because of being isolated in the mountains after the destruction of Sodom, with no blood kin close by, they got themselves pregnant by their father (after getting him drunk) so as to preserve his family line. It was done with the noblest of intent.

Quoted from "GotQuestions"

We also have to think of the flood in Noah's time....now they have to start all over again...
Genesis 6—9 records the events of Noah’s flood, also called the Great Flood. If the genealogy provided in Genesis 5 is intended to be comprehensive, we can determine the dates of various events by simply adding up the time spans between fathers and sons, given in Genesis 5:

Adam to Seth — 130 years
Seth to Enosh — 105 years
Enosh to Kenan — 90 years
Kenan to Mahalalel — 70 years
Mahalalel to Jared — 65 years
Jared to Enoch — 162 years
Enoch to Methuselah — 65 years
Methuselah to Lamech —187 years
Lamech to Noah —182 years

According to this method, the time from Adam to Noah was approximately 1,056 years. These are approximate times because we don’t know if the years are counted from conception or birth; also, it is obvious that the years are given in whole numbers but no doubt included (or excluded) partial years. (For instance, Adam was 130 years old when Seth was born, give or take a certain number of months and days.)

So we have Noah’s birth, which occurred about 1,056 years after the creation of Adam. Then, in Genesis 7:11, we are told that the flood came in the 600th year of Noah’s life, so that would mean the Great Flood came approximately 1,656 years after Adam was created in Eden. Using a similar method places the creation of Adam and Eve at around 4004 BC. So, doing the math, Noah’s flood occurred in approximately 2348 BC.

Similar genealogies are found throughout the Old Testament. Using the same method places Abraham’s calling at 228 years after Noah’s flood or about 1,884 years after the dawn of humanity. We can also use the genealogies to count backward from other dates that we know, such as the fall of Jerusalem. Using this method, Abraham was born about 2166 BC, and the exodus during Moses’ time would have happened about 1446 BC.

Some scholars believe that the genealogies are not intended, and were never understood by the original audience, to be exhaustive. It could be that generations were skipped, as we know happened in the genealogy of Jesus recorded in Matthew. If this is the case in the Genesis 5 genealogy, and there are years unaccounted for, then we really have no idea when the Great Flood took place.

 

[Aunty Jane]

It might be considered that the genetic code was flawless at that time....what about the fallen angels who came and bred with the daughters of man?
It doesn't mention whether the offspring married and reproduced...but I suppose they did.

The Bible would have kept an account if these 'freaks' of nature had reproduced, but as it is with most hybrid creatures produced by man, (mules, ligers, zonkeys) they are invariably sterile. God wiped out those gigantic, violent bullies because they had no right to live.

The flood also sent their errant fathers back to the spirit realm because there was nothing to save them from drowning except to dematerialize or die. The only living things to survive were on a vessel that had God's protection. Once back where God could impose sanctions upon them, there is no record of them ever materializing again.

 

[Webers_Home]

.

Pre-law vs Post-law.

According to Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13, and Gal 3:17 the laws of
God are not retroactive, viz: incest is not a violation where there is no rule
against it.
_

 

[Heart2Soul]

.


According to Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13, and Gal 3:17 the laws of
God are not retroactive, viz: incest is not a violation where there is no rule
against it.
_

Well exactly...that's what I was saying...it wasn't incest until God commanded it to end.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
FAQ: What's different from when incest was legal and later when it became
illegal?

A: The human body's vitality has undergone quite a bit of deterioration over
the years. For example; prior to the Flood, the body could get by on fruits,
vegetables, and grains. After the Flood, its diet was adjusted to include
meats.

Apparently the inclusion of meat in Man's diet after the Flood was intended
primarily as a source of natural supplements to make up for the human
body's gradually lessening ability to manufacture all its own essential
vitamins; much the same reason that modern vegans resort to synthetic
supplements in order to avoid contracting deficiency diseases.

According to an article in the Dec 10, 2013 Science section of the New York
Times, scientists believe that the early human body was able to manufacture
all of its own essential vitamins; but over time gradually lost the ability to
manufacture all but K and D.

That seems plausible to me seeing as how Noah lived to be 950 years old,
but by the time of Abraham, the human life span had decreased
considerably to 175, which Gen 25:7-8 describes as a ripe old age; so the
human body was obviously a whole lot healthier before it became necessary
for God to prohibit incest in the covenant that His people agreed upon with
Him in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
_