Biblical Incest

  • Thread starter Thread starter jay29
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jay29

Guest
I was confronted as being a bible thumper who believes in incest because of Adam and Eve and multiplying of humans in the beginning of the OT.

How do I respond to this correctly?
 
Only incest in the direct line (parent/child/grandchild/in-laws) is divinely prohibited and the bible clearly shows this is wrong in the instances when this type of activity happened (i.e. Lot and his daughters).

Intermarriage in the collateral line is regulated by Chuch Law only, *not *divine law. Yes, God allowed siblings and cousins to marry, and so forth, to populate the earth.

There is nothing to defend here.
 
The law angist incest or marring one’s sister came much later after adam and eve. At the time of adam and eve the gene pool did not have the abuduence of ressive genes that cause birth defects. Later when those ressive genes were more abudundent those God forbade incest.
 
Consider this: Adam and Eve began bearing children. At the earliest point in the history of mankind, *who else *was there to procreate with besides your biological brother or sister?

Later on, God forbade it, as well stated above.

The one who accuses you isn’t using common sense.
 
1ke said:
Only incest in the direct line (parent/child/grandchild/in-laws) is divinely prohibited and the bible clearly shows this is wrong in the instances when this type of activity happened (i.e. Lot and his daughters).

Intermarriage in the collateral line is regulated by Chuch Law only, *not *divine law. Yes, God allowed siblings and cousins to marry, and so forth, to populate the earth.

There is nothing to defend here.
Click to expand...
I would only point out that if it were not for Lot and his daughters, King David would not have been born.
 
BanksOfTheTiber said:
Consider this: Adam and Eve began bearing children. At the earliest point in the history of mankind, *who else *was there to procreate with besides your biological brother or sister?

Later on, God forbade it, as well stated above.

The one who accuses you isn’t using common sense.
Click to expand...
The one who is accusing you is recognising the fact that God makes the rules, and thus are in fact recognising the existence of God – without God there are no absoultes
 
Valke2 said:
I would only point out that if it were not for Lot and his daughters, King David would not have been born.
Click to expand...
Because of Ruth, I hope? What tribe was she from?

Edited and Appended: Ah, I see. She was a Moabite, from the tribe of Moab, Lot’s daughter. Good point, Valke. But it certainly doesn’t legalize incest.

I understant the the Amonites and the Moabites weren’t exactly the favorite neighbors of the Israelites. This would have made the lesson against incest very strong to Ancient Israel.

“Don’t commit incest or your kids will grow up to be no better than those filthy Amonites and Moabites”.
 
1ke said:
Only incest in the direct line (parent/child/grandchild/in-laws) is divinely prohibited and the bible clearly shows this is wrong in the instances when this type of activity happened (i.e. Lot and his daughters).

Intermarriage in the collateral line is regulated by Chuch Law only, *not *divine law. Yes, God allowed siblings and cousins to marry, and so forth, to populate the earth.
Click to expand...
What about Leviticus 18:9? That’s not divine law?
 
Valke2 said:
I would only point out that if it were not for Lot and his daughters, King David would not have been born.
Click to expand...
Shouldn’t we also point out that the entire Chosen People were the result of an incestuous (half-)brother-sister relationship between Abram and Sarah?
 
:cool:
NotWorthy said:
Because of Ruth, I hope? What tribe was she from?

Edited and Appended: Ah, I see. She was a Moabite, from the tribe of Moab, Lot’s daughter. Good point, Valke. But it certainly doesn’t legalize incest.

I understant the the Amonites and the Moabites weren’t exactly the favorite neighbors of the Israelites. This would have made the lesson against incest very strong to Ancient Israel.

“Don’t commit incest or your kids will grow up to be no better than those filthy Amonites and Moabites”.
Click to expand...
No. It doesn’t legalize or promote incest. But it does show that no matter how humble one’s background, the individual is blessed with the ability to change the world for the better.
 
Timidity said:
Shouldn’t we also point out that the entire Chosen People were the result of an incestuous (half-)brother-sister relationship between Abram and Sarah?
Click to expand...
Sure. The Talmud says that Sarah was actually Abraham’s niece. The daughter of one of his brothers. But Isaac and Rebekah were also related (distantly).
 
Valke2 said:
Sure. The Talmud says that Sarah was actually Abraham’s niece. The daughter of one of his brothers. But Isaac and Rebekah were also related (distantly).
Click to expand...
Really? Interesting. Is the Talmud says that the Torah is wrong, or is it adding to it? Or is it a translation issue where “…she is truly my sister, the daughter of my father, and not the daughter of my mother, and I took her to wife…” means “niece” but was mistranslated into English?
 
Valke2 said:
:cool:

No. It doesn’t legalize or promote incest. But it does show that no matter how humble one’s background, the individual is blessed with the ability to change the world for the better.
Click to expand...
If one were to look at the Toledoth of Jesus, Son of David, Son of Abraham, one would see such “humble” ancestors.

Rahab and Tamar certainly don’t give credence to any pedigree of Jesus’.

Very good point, Valke!
 
Timidity said:
What about Leviticus 18:9? That’s not divine law?
Click to expand...
No.

God is calling his people out to live differently from those in the pagan lands around them, and he reiterates the Divine Law via the 10 Commandments, and also begins to give them rules to live by in addition to the divine law-- specific laws for the chosen people.

So, he begins to give them laws and ordinances to which they were not previously subject-- and prohibitions regarding degrees in the collateral line begin to take form. Other restrictions are introduced here, such as the kosher eating laws. Some of these laws come from God, and some from Moses.
 
1ke said:
No.

God is calling his people out to live differently from those in the pagan lands around them, and he reiterates the Divine Law via the 10 Commandments, and also begins to give them rules to live by in addition to the divine law-- specific laws for the chosen people.

So, he begins to give them laws and ordinances to which they were not previously subject-- and prohibitions regarding degrees in the collateral line begin to take form. Other restrictions are introduced here, such as the kosher eating laws. Some of these laws come from God, and some from Moses.
Click to expand...
But since Moses is God’s chosen Covenant Mediator, his authority is divinely given.

The Jews considered these laws as binding as if they were God-breathed.
 
NotWorthy said:
But since Moses is God’s chosen Covenant Mediator, his authority is divinely given.
Click to expand...
Yes, his *authority *was divinely given.

We also believe the Magesterium and their laws to be given with divine authority. They are God’s chosen Bishops, appointed over us.
NotWorthy said:
The Jews considered these laws as binding as if they were God-breathed.
Click to expand...
Yes, just as our laws given by the lawful church authority are binding-- but they are changeable.

The Divine Law is immutable.
 
The words of Lev. 18:9 are attributed directly to God. Look at 18:1"And the Lord said to Moses".

These are not laws that Moses made. They are laws that were given by God to Moses. How can thay not be di8vine?
 
1ke said:
Yes, his *authority *was divinely given.

We also believe the Magesterium and their laws to be given with divine authority. They are God’s chosen Bishops, appointed over us.

Yes, just as our laws given by the lawful church authority are binding-- but they are changeable.

The Divine Law is immutable.
Click to expand...
The Divine Law is immutable?!? Isn’t that what Jesus did at the Sermon on the Mount? Didn’t He refine them?

He transformed the external Laws of the 10 commandments and internalized them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top