Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Why didn't Adam and Eve die when they ate the fruit?

Page 2 of 3 [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

izzeme
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,665

20 May 2016, 3:46 am

LyraLuthTinu wrote:
Quote:
who did adams sons marry?

Seriously? People are still trying this old wheeze in their attempts to discredit the Bible?


Nah, i'm just using this old wheeze to indicate problems with the genisis story; the bible does a pretty good job at discrediting itself, it doesn't need my help.

Quote:
Adam had sons and daughters. Being only one generation away from absolute genetic perfection (no mutations existed as of yet), incest would not have been an issue. Therefore, obviously, Adam's sons married their sisters.
:roll:


Alright. lets say, for the sake of argument, that i accept this; does that mean that Noah also was genetically perfect, many generations later? since he and his family were the only ones to surivive the flood (according to the bible), there is another incest-based start of the population, starting anew.



YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

20 May 2016, 7:31 am

Quote:
Alright. lets say, for the sake of argument, that i accept this; does that mean that Noah also was genetically perfect, many generations later? since he and his family were the only ones to surivive the flood (according to the bible), there is another incest-based start of the population, starting anew.


Didn't Noah have a large extended family on the Ark, though? I mean, he had many adult children who were already married with families of their own. Some degree of incest would still be required at some point, but probably just a cousin-cousin relationship.
Anyway, "the world" could be interpreted as just the whole part of the world with which Noah and his civilization were familiar. I mean, who knows if South America flooded, or Russia, or England, etc. There is historical and geological evidence for an enormous flood that affected a good portion of the Earth, but it probably wasn't a Waterworld-type event.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

20 May 2016, 12:49 pm

LyraLuthTinu wrote:
In this case the definition of [death] is separation from God as much as anything else.

Also, if they had not eaten the fruit they would not have died but lived in the Garden forever (or until someone else ate the fruit, as someone would surely have done. Note the rebellion of their first son, Cain).
\


This doesnt make any sense.

Genesis clearly implies that both death, and reproduction, were the result of the Fall and both began with expulsion from the Garden.

Therefore if the couple had obeyed God, and had not eaten the fruit they would have been immortals living forever in the Garden of Eden, and would not have had any offspring. One of the punishments they had to suffer was that Eve (and all of her female descendants) would "have to suffer the pain of childbirth".

No Fall, then no "pain of childbirth", ergo no children, ergo no descendants. Which makes sense because if you're immortal then you have no need of procreation to propagate the species anyway. So no one else, Cain nor anyone, would have "come along" to eat the fruit.

But who knows? Adam and Eve themselves might have been in the Garden a million years prior to the dirty deed. Maybe they got bored one day.



Last edited by naturalplastic on 20 May 2016, 1:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

20 May 2016, 1:02 pm

YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
Alright. lets say, for the sake of argument, that i accept this; does that mean that Noah also was genetically perfect, many generations later? since he and his family were the only ones to surivive the flood (according to the bible), there is another incest-based start of the population, starting anew.


Didn't Noah have a large extended family on the Ark, though? I mean, he had many adult children who were already married with families of their own. Some degree of incest would still be required at some point, but probably just a cousin-cousin relationship.
Anyway, "the world" could be interpreted as just the whole part of the world with which Noah and his civilization were familiar. I mean, who knows if South America flooded, or Russia, or England, etc. There is historical and geological evidence for an enormous flood that affected a good portion of the Earth, but it probably wasn't a Waterworld-type event.


Eight people: Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives. Thats it. The whole human crew of the Ark according to scripture. You could speculate that ther must have been more people, but then you would be straying from strict adherence to scripture.

But you're right that Noah's Ark presents a severe bottleneck for human genetic diversity to pass through, and would have caused a second phase when they would be forced to commit incest to get spouses.



marcb0t
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: Washington

20 May 2016, 1:21 pm

LyraLuthTinu wrote:
In this case the definition of [death] is separation from God as much as anything else.

Also, if they had not eaten the fruit they would not have died but lived in the Garden forever (or until someone else ate the fruit, as someone would surely have done. Note the rebellion of their first son, Cain).

Also:
Quote:
who did adams sons marry?

Seriously? People are still trying this old wheeze in their attempts to discredit the Bible?

Adam had sons and daughters. Being only one generation away from absolute genetic perfection (no mutations existed as of yet), incest would not have been an issue. Therefore, obviously, Adam's sons married their sisters.
:roll:

^^This! :wink:


_________________
The cutest most lovable little rob0t on Earth! (^.^)


marcb0t
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: Washington

20 May 2016, 1:30 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
LyraLuthTinu wrote:
In this case the definition of [death] is separation from God as much as anything else.

Also, if they had not eaten the fruit they would not have died but lived in the Garden forever (or until someone else ate the fruit, as someone would surely have done. Note the rebellion of their first son, Cain).
\


This doesnt make any sense.

Genesis clearly implies that both death, and reproduction, were the result of the Fall and both began with expulsion from the Garden.

That's not exactly true. Here, read this:

God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
Genesis 1:28 NIV

This is a couple of chapters prior to the fall.

God created man for fellowship and for bringing Him glory. So the more people, the more both those things increase. Reproduction would have happened apart from the fall.


_________________
The cutest most lovable little rob0t on Earth! (^.^)


YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

20 May 2016, 3:11 pm

Quote:
Eight people: Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives. Thats it. The whole human crew of the Ark according to scripture


There may also have been daughters and their husbands. Female offspring usually weren't mentioned in the Bible.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

20 May 2016, 3:31 pm

Edenthiel wrote:
LyraLuthTinu wrote:
Also:
Quote:
who did adams sons marry?

Seriously? People are still trying this old wheeze in their attempts to discredit the Bible?

Adam had sons and daughters. Being only one generation away from absolute genetic perfection (no mutations existed as of yet), incest would not have been an issue. Therefore, obviously, Adam's sons married their sisters.
:roll:


That implies a constant degradation of genetics, from the assumed 1st generation until now. It is also the basis of racism, sexism and any other bigotry based on the assumption that one group of inherent biological features is further from the Grace of God than another. Furthermore, it is also the very argument used for centuries to keep people with mental illnesses, Down syndrome & other developmental disabilities and yes, AUTISM from openly living in society. It's the reason so many of us in the past were kept literally locked up, due to the family's shame at being further from God.


Umm racism, sexism and bigotry aren't to do with genetics...genetics control how you look not how you think or what morals you have.

And what exactly is the argument that has been used for centuries to keep people with mental illness and developmental disabilities down? I have studied psychology and in the past mental illness and developmental disabilities have been treated like demonic possession or influence of the devil...can you imagine having people try to exercise the demons from you for exhibiting abnormal behavior tied to autism?

And in the early days of this nation before it was established it was even worse for women who likely had mental illnesses or developmental disorders or were just a little different, as they were put on trial for being witches and burned at the stake.

Clearly its denial of God and religion that leads for mistreatment of mentally ill, developmentally disabled and autistic people, and godly Christians have always treated them with the utmost respect and care....NOT.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Deltaville
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 941
Location: SystemShock Universe

20 May 2016, 9:52 pm

As a Roman Catholic, I am far more interested in more documented miracles such as the resurrection of Jesus.


_________________
Sebastian

"Don't forget to floss." - Darkwing Duck


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

22 May 2016, 12:28 pm

YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
Eight people: Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives. Thats it. The whole human crew of the Ark according to scripture


There may also have been daughters and their husbands. Female offspring usually weren't mentioned in the Bible.


And the movie star, the millionaire, and his wife,and Gilligan, the Skipper too, and the rest :)



Last edited by naturalplastic on 22 May 2016, 1:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

lostonearth35
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2010
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,896
Location: On a planet where I don't belong.

22 May 2016, 12:33 pm

"If God had killed them for eating the fruit we wouldn't be here".

Does that mean we're all inbred? I mean, if they really populate the earth, when their kids grew up, who did *they* have kids with?



UncannyDanny
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,238
Location: Middle-Earth

22 May 2016, 12:52 pm

I think the snake who made Adam and Eve eat the fruit was the one who invented peer pressure.

Snake: Hello.
Eve: Oh, hello, little snake.
Snake: Hey, Eve. Want to hear a ssssecret to being wissssse?
Eve: Okay, sure. What is it?
Snake: Ssssssee that fruit over there?
Eve: Yes?
Snake: Pluck it off the branch, and sssshare it with Adam, then you two be the wissssesssst humanssss on earth.
Eve: What? Eat the fruit that we're not allowed to eat? But Father God said.....
Snake: Come on, now. Father God issss not here, issss he? What he doessssn't know can't hurt Him.....right?



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

22 May 2016, 1:23 pm

lostonearth35 wrote:
"If God had killed them for eating the fruit we wouldn't be here".

Does that mean we're all inbred? I mean, if they really populate the earth, when their kids grew up, who did *they* have kids with?

Thats what Lyra, and Marchbot,claim.

That we are all descended from a bunch of inbred peckerwoods!



izzeme
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,665

23 May 2016, 8:15 am

YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
Alright. lets say, for the sake of argument, that i accept this; does that mean that Noah also was genetically perfect, many generations later? since he and his family were the only ones to surivive the flood (according to the bible), there is another incest-based start of the population, starting anew.


Didn't Noah have a large extended family on the Ark, though? I mean, he had many adult children who were already married with families of their own. Some degree of incest would still be required at some point, but probably just a cousin-cousin relationship.
Anyway, "the world" could be interpreted as just the whole part of the world with which Noah and his civilization were familiar. I mean, who knows if South America flooded, or Russia, or England, etc. There is historical and geological evidence for an enormous flood that affected a good portion of the Earth, but it probably wasn't a Waterworld-type event.

The bible claims that it was "the entire world".
Sure, if the flood only affected the small part where noah lived, that solves a lot of problems, but it also removed the divine intervention as well as the need for the ark; the nile-delta in egypt has floods like that every year, some miracle that is.

A lot of the miracles in the bible can be explained in a fashion that makes them less far-fetched and more believable.
Doing so, however, removes the "miracle" tag from the event, as it will now have a possible natural explanation; which a miracle, by definition, does not.



Grischa
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

Joined: 22 Apr 2016
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 401

23 May 2016, 8:34 am

izzeme wrote:
A lot of the miracles in the bible can be explained in a fashion that makes them less far-fetched and more believable.
Doing so, however, removes the "miracle" tag from the event, as it will now have a possible natural explanation; which a miracle, by definition, does not.


applies even to Adam and Eve; in science now they have a "mitochondrial Eve" and an "Y-crhomosomal-Adam" as concept of most recent common ancestors,
not so poetic, but still more credible
btw: according to DNA research these two ancestors did not 6000 years ago, were not alone on earth, and did not live in the same age
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosomal_Adam



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

23 May 2016, 4:45 pm

Grischa wrote:
izzeme wrote:
A lot of the miracles in the bible can be explained in a fashion that makes them less far-fetched and more believable.
Doing so, however, removes the "miracle" tag from the event, as it will now have a possible natural explanation; which a miracle, by definition, does not.


applies even to Adam and Eve; in science now they have a "mitochondrial Eve" and an "Y-crhomosomal-Adam" as concept of most recent common ancestors,
not so poetic, but still more credible
btw: according to DNA research these two ancestors did not 6000 years ago, were not alone on earth, and did not live in the same age
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosomal_Adam


Calling them "Adam, and Eve" is just media poetic license. Niether mitocondrial Eve,nor Y-Chromosomal Adam, were the founders of the human species. They were just the two individuals whom all living humans by chance happen to have been dealt DNA cards from after many generations of reshuffling. As you said there were thousands of other hominids around at the seperate times that the two lived.