Take the 2-minute tour ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

After Cain killed Abel, he was cast away and said "whoever finds me will kill me", there he took a wife.

This indicates there were other people on the face of the earth created by God or is there another explanation?

The reason I ask this is that Adam and Eve are supposedly the couple that gave birth to all humanity, which is (presumably) genetically impossible.

share|improve this question
1  
Lillith. ;) –  TRiG Apr 23 '13 at 16:20
    
"Literal" and "non-literal" Christian views will disagree on this, so this is a Truth question that will lead to a voting contest. –  Alypius Apr 25 '13 at 5:44
    
    
Please narrow this to a subset of Christian views on the subject. As Alypius points out there is a wide range of potential interpretations here. Please do some research to determine which potential reading you want more information or clarification on. –  wax eagle Apr 25 '13 at 17:00
add comment

closed as not constructive by Alypius, David Stratton, wax eagle Apr 25 '13 at 16:59

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

4 Answers

up vote 5 down vote accepted

"Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living." Genesis 3:20 (NIV). So according to Genesis Eve was the mother of all living, so that means there were no other directly created people. Also Romans 5:12 "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned." If there were more directly created people, original sin would mean nothing because it would not have been passed on, there would have been lines where Adams sin would not have "infected" his none-offspring.

The assertion that this is genetically impossible is certainly not a scientific one for whatever passes for "science" in your mind, the consensus even among evolutionist atheists has been for quite some time that modern humans had a single matriarchal ancestor. Anyone who claims it's science to say two people with the proper genetic code can't create the diversity we have today doesn't understand basic genetics. (And neither did Darwin, he was a botanist NOT an educated biologist).

share|improve this answer
    
I guess that Genesis 3:20 clears that up. Also Romans. Really nice to have these Bible verses. Exactly what I was looking for. Totaly forgot about them. Thanks. –  Fofole Apr 24 '13 at 7:48
    
"[W]hatever passes for 'science' in your mind[.]" And you wonder why these godless, "evolutionary [A]theists" deem the religious uneducated? Genetic diversity needs only one thing to occur- genetic diversity. Adam and Eve share the same genetic code (Eve being made out of Adam's rib), therefore making it impossible for variation to be present. –  RandomDuck.NET Apr 25 '13 at 3:04
    
@RandomDuck.NET I asked mainly hoping for the Biblical approach on whether or not where other people created. On the genetic side, I found valid explanations elsewhere. –  Fofole Apr 26 '13 at 7:03
add comment

According to the Bible, God created no other people besides Adam and Eve. Adam was created from the dust of the earth, while Eve was created from Adam (perhaps his rib).

Genesis 5 indicates that Adam and Eve had quite a few children. We have names for Cain, Abel, Seth, other sons (plural) and daughters (plural). So, at a minimum, they had seven children. If we assume that the birthrate for women is just equal to that of men, then Eve may well have had five daughters, pushing the total to ten. The earth at that time was very fruitful, and people lived a very long time, so she may well have had more than that.

Genetically speaking, it is not impossible at all that one couple could give birth to all humanity. Just because one scientist asserts something to be true does not make it so.

See this article regarding skin tones and this article regarding a challenge to that claim altogether.

share|improve this answer
1  
I would not want to defend the position that God created no other people besides Adam and Eve. In addition to the evidence cited in the question, you do have science against you on this one. –  rmayer06 Apr 23 '13 at 15:27
1  
@rmayer06 There was no scientific evidence cited in the question--only an assertion. My answer does cite scientific articles, so I actually have science with me on this one. In reality, there are scientific assertions on both sides. –  Narnian Apr 23 '13 at 16:21
    
My point wasn't that there is no "evidence" on both sides. My point is that the view of exactly how god created them is simplistic and in contrast to what is commonly accepted as scientific fact. Therefore, if your evangelization effort requires someone to ultimately accept this series of events as fact, you will have an unnecessary (and irrelevant) stumbling block to the faith. –  rmayer06 Apr 23 '13 at 17:58
add comment

Let me bring up some unauthentic book.

The Book of Adam and Eve gives a good explanation to this confusion. The first son, Cain was born along with his twin sister Luluwa. The second son, Abel also had a twin sister Aklia. After Cain murdered Abel, Cain married his twin sister Luluwa.

As we know, the Bible rarely mentions the name of women, their is no doubt that those first daughters of Adam and Eve were also not mentioned in the Bible. The writer, probably Moses might have assume that there was no strong reason to mention the names of the first daughters and might even did not think that the readers like us will later come up with this kind of questions.

When Cain said "whoever finds me will kill me", it does not necessarily mean that there were already other people on earth. Remember that those days the lifespan of human was above 900 years and less than 1000 years. Cain simply meant that the people who will born later will want to kill him because he is a murderer. And we know very well that 900 years is enough for a civilization to rise. Although Cain did not know how long he will live, he also did not know when he will die. There was no one yet who saw how a man will die of old age. Cain would surely think that he will at least live for a long time because death by old age was not yet known to them.

share|improve this answer
    
Well, we know that it took China 1000 years to reach a level of basic civilization, making me question your thesis. –  RandomDuck.NET Apr 25 '13 at 3:09
    
@RandomDuck.NET "Civilization" is a controversial term indeed. The intention is only to highlight the possibility of many nations coming out of just a single couple. –  Mawia Apr 25 '13 at 5:01
add comment

Well, of course you may believe whatever you would like, as there is no way to conclusively prove one way or the other (at least, no so that everyone will accept).

Now that my disclaimer is out of the way, I think the question is irrelevant. Genesis was never meant to be a documentary of how the earth or its inhabitants came into being. It is designed to convey a faith that God is the creator and is the ruler of all. Most importantly, God made mankind in His image. Genesis sets forth a fundamental relationship between God and His people. It marks the beginning of the history of salvation. If we get tied up in trivialities (such as this), I think we miss the point of Genesis.

Furthermore, a faith that blatantly ignores the realities of science is doomed to be ridiculed by more rational and educated individuals, and this need not be the case. Faith can (and must) inform scientific practice, but we must also recognize that God made creation, and we can also learn about God through creation and the scientific methods he gave us to explore it. In fact, that is what we are called to do!

I think this site has an interesting discussion on the issue: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/creation-and-genesis

share|improve this answer
6  
Your assertion that your view of the intent of Genesis is the only valid one is untenable. Furthermore, the idea that Adam and Eve are the ancestors of all people does not in any way go against science. –  Narnian Apr 23 '13 at 16:23
    
@Narnian He did not say any of that. Read what he said without adding your own interpretation, and let others do the same. What he says about Genesis is perfectly standard as the "broad message". Then he gives a link to about 10 Church Fathers, which says that the views were divergent (not the "only valid one"). That's the opposite of what you accused him of. –  Alypius Apr 25 '13 at 5:25
    
Hey, welcome to the site! Sorry that you got a crappy welcome. Usually we're especially nice to people who are making their first post (easy to see from your rep) even when they say something weird (you didn't). Just some advice, when you answer, don't say "I think". Even when I've done the research, if I add something like that, people are much more likely to think it's just opinion. Some people vote on answers based on how confident the person sounds, not based on what they wrote. –  Alypius Apr 25 '13 at 5:39
    
Hi, thanks. I will probably stay away from religious debates because it is rather pointless anyway. I'm a scientist, I think rationally, and that is likely to cause consternation among those who are far less rational than I am. Oh well... –  rmayer06 Apr 26 '13 at 18:54
    
AND, to those of you who downvoted my post, you have no reason for doing so, other than you disagree with what I say (clearly, by your lack of comments to the contrary). Too bad rationality rarely wins in religious arguments... –  rmayer06 Apr 26 '13 at 18:57
add comment

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.