Establishing the human race from Adam and Eve

[catlover]

Ok, I'm sure this has been talked about before but if I had someone ask me I really could not give a good answer. I'm going on the hypothesis that brothers and sisters had children together in the beginning. Why was it ok then but not now?? And when was it established that a man could have only one wife.?

[jayne]

I'm going on the hypothesis that brothers and sisters had children together in the beginning. Why was it ok then but not now??

Today, it's not wise and in most places around the world - not lawful - to for brothers and sisters to marry because they share too much DNA. We ALL came from a Adam and Eve and after the Flood, Noah and Mrs. Noah, but it's important to procreate with someone whose DNA is far removed from yours and that means no immediate family members.

Because the children of Adam and Eve had DNA that was virtually untainted (99.99999% perfect and without mutations), there was almost literally no opportunity for mutations, which blood relatives share today, to pass on to the next generation because they HAD no mutations.

Not all mutations are harmful. Some are very benign and even desirable. Blond hair is a mutation.

But if someone today carried a genetic trait for Huntington's Disease and married a sibling who also carried the gene, then their offspring would stand a MUCH greater chance of actually exhibiting Huntington's Disease than if they married someone who is not a blood sibling.

Restrictions on marrying close (immediate family) blood relatives (Leviticus 18-20) came much later (in the Law about 2,500 years later) as humanity's DNA deteriorated (beginning with Adam and Eve's children) because of sin's curse.

[BroRog]

Ok, I'm sure this has been talked about before but if I had someone ask me I really could not give a good answer. I'm going on the hypothesis that brothers and sisters had children together in the beginning. Why was it ok then but not now?? And when was it established that a man could have only one wife.?

I think we can conclude that the moral training of the Human race progressed over time.

[moonglow]

Today, it's not wise and in most places around the world - not lawful - to for brothers and sisters to marry because they share too much DNA. We ALL came from a Adam and Eve and after the Flood, Noah and Mrs. Noah, but it's important to procreate with someone whose DNA is far removed from yours and that means no immediate family members.

Because the children of Adam and Eve had DNA that was virtually untainted (99.99999% perfect and without mutations), there was almost literally no opportunity for mutations, which blood relatives share today, to pass on to the next generation because they HAD no mutations.

Not all mutations are harmful. Some are very benign and even desirable. Blond hair is a mutation.

But if someone today carried a genetic trait for Huntington's Disease and married a sibling who also carried the gene, then their offspring would stand a MUCH greater chance of actually exhibiting Huntington's Disease than if they married someone who is not a blood sibling.

Restrictions on marrying close (immediate family) blood relatives (Leviticus 18-20) came much later (in the Law about 2,500 years later) as humanity's DNA deteriorated (beginning with Adam and Eve's children) because of sin's curse.

jayne is right about this...the laws against marrying a sibling didn't come into effect until much later. And everything else she posted is correct too!

God bless

[Steward]

I think we can conclude that the moral training of the Human race progressed over time.

And will continue......

[teddyv]

Because the children of Adam and Eve had DNA that was virtually untainted (99.99999% perfect and without mutations), there was almost literally no opportunity for mutations, which blood relatives share today, to pass on to the next generation because they HAD no mutations.

Just to be a pain (), this is of course, very speculative with no real Biblical evidence. It is a concordist attempt to reconcile modern genetic understanding with the Biblical narrative.

[losthorizon]

Just to be a pain (), this is of course, very speculative with no real Biblical evidence. It is a concordist attempt to reconcile modern genetic understanding with the Biblical narrative.

Hi Teddy - do you find a conflict between modern genetic understanding and the historical Biblical narrative?