Did Christianity begin with incest?
442556
The Bible doesn't give a whole lot of information on early man.  For example, we don't know how genetically similar Adam and Eve were.  We also don't know where the wives of their sons came from.  Did God create other humans?  Did they marry their sisters?  The Bible doesn't give answers to these questions.  Maybe God didn't think it was very important for us to know.  Perhaps early man wasn't interested in the complex details of the situation, so it wasn't recorded.\n\nChristians refer to people as God's children because of the special relationship that humans can have with God.  Just as our human father is suppose to love and take care of us, encourage us and help us grow, so that's the type of relationship that God wants to have with us.
308936
God started by creating Adam and Eve who were the first to begin procreating. They were having sons who were marrying wives after settling in other areas. Nowhere does it say Adam and Eve were the ONLY humans God created. He created wives for Adam and Eve's Sons.\nWhat you're suggesting makes no sense. If any human or animal or creature attempts to mate with the wrong species, even if successful at it, the progeny end up sterile.\nIt's pretty clear from Genesis Chapters 4 and 5 that Eve was not mating with her sons.\n***\nAs for the sister theory it doesn't work either because Genesis gives a sequential account of who Eve was giving birth to. There were no sisters yet for Cain.\n***\nI'm using a New American Standard version which is considered the to be the most scholarly accurate as far as I know and it's a bit different from what you wrote:\n5:1 - This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day when God created man, He made him in the likeness of God.\n2 - He created THEM male and female, and he blessed them and named THEM Man in the day when they were created.\n\nThere is no account of incest of any kind. God created wives for Adam's sons separately.
188350
If you already know Christmas trees and Easter eggs were originally Pagan, and you probably know the traditional mid-winter and spring timing of the two holidays was Pagan too. Mildly interesting. Not what you'll find here. \n\nWhat you'll discover here is that Christianity inherited everything from the Pagans. The core of Christianity—the worship of a godman who brings salvation—was also the core of other ancient religions that began in the Near East two thousand years before Jesus. \n\nChristian theology borrowed more than the myth of the saving godman. Initiation by baptism, communion with the God through a holy meal, the Holy Spirit, monotheism, and immortality of the soul all belonged many ancient faiths. They were simply part of ancient Mediterranean culture.\n\nChristianity also borrowed elements of Jesus' mythology. Sons of God born of a mortal woman, and miracles (including turning water into wine, walking on water, and especially healing the sick) were common elements of pre-Christian Pagan religions. Mithras had 'em. So did Dionysus, Attis, Osiris, and Orpheus. And more. \n\nAnd they had them centuries before Christianity was a twinkle in Saint Paul's eye.\n\nWhen Osiris is said to bring his believers eternal life in Egyptian Heaven, contemplating the unutterable, indescribable glory of God, \nwe understand that as a myth. \n\nWhen the sacred rites of Demeter at Eleusis are described as bringing believers happiness in their eternal life, we understand that as a myth.\n\nWhen Dionysus turned water into wine, we understand that as a myth. When Dionysus believers are filled with atay, the Spirit of God, we understand that as a myth.\n\nWhen Romulus is described as the Son of God, born of a virgin, \nwe understand that as a myth.\n\nWhen Alexander the Great is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a myth.\n\nWhen Augustus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a myth. \n\nWhen Dionysus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a myth.\n\nSo how come when Jesus is described as the Son of God,      born of a mortal woman, according to prophecy,          turning water into wine and how come, in a culture with all those Sons of God, where miracles were science, where Heaven and Hell and God and eternal life and salvation were in the temples, in the philosophies, in the books, were dancing and howling in street festivals, how come we imagine Jesus and the stories about him developed all on their own, all by themselves, without picking up any of their stuff from the culture they sprang from, the culture full of the same sort of stuff?
727423
Leviticus 18:6-18 (New International Version)\nNew International Version (NIV)\nCopyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society\n\n    \n\n 6 " 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD. \n\n 7 " 'Do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; do not have relations with her. \n\n 8 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's wife; that would dishonor your father. \n\n 9 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father's daughter or your mother's daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere. \n\n 10 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your son's daughter or your daughter's daughter; that would dishonor you. \n\n 11 " 'Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father's wife, born to your father; she is your sister. \n\n 12 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's sister; she is your father's close relative. \n\n 13 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your mother's sister, because she is your mother's close relative. \n\n 14 " 'Do not dishonor your father's brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations; she is your aunt. \n\n 15 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son's wife; do not have relations with her. \n\n 16 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your brother's wife; that would dishonor your brother. \n\n 17 " 'Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness. \n\n 18 " 'Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.\n\n------------\n  it is also against the law
981171
No. Just because someone was raised with the moral teachings of Christianity doesn't mean they are Christian. Being a Christian means being born again, a choice one has to make to be.
366336
Of course not! what gave you that idea?!\n \n Romans 1:26-26 "That is why God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; and likewise even the males left the natural use of a female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males,working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error." \n\n1 Cor 6:9 "What! Do you not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God's kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men."\n\n God hates fornication and homosexuality and lesbianism.  Anyone who practices those things will not inherit God's Kingdom.
377031
dunno...\nbut it started with adam and eve...\nbecause of the "man and wife" thing...
262229
Like dugh! Christianty comes from like a broken home and stuff. No mother, no Goddess in heaven. I would so die without my mother....no wait, I'd never have been born without my mother.\n\nFood for thought.
1164903
Good question! \n\nFirst of all, they didn't have any children until they were expelled from the Garden.\n\nIt would SEEM that the brothers and sisters would have to marry each other (ick), since the Bible says this is the only family on Earth.\n\nOf course, when Cain murdered Abel, the Bible also says that he went off to live with people in the land of Nod . . . so where did those people come from?!?!\n\nWhat?  The Bible internally inconsistent?!?!?  Shocking!!!
182047
ive been asking myself this for some time now, and incest is the most likely answer, unless the whole christian thing is a joke that went too far or something.. i am a christian but i do have doubt about the religion, i find the fact there is an all knowing supernatural being in heaven and he made the universe and earth and life. But if there was only two people around then the're must have been incest or some sort of deformity or mutation to get anywhere.
813373
Christianity of 200 years ago was propagated by preaching, not by the sword. Christians don't cut your head off if you refuse to become Christian.
5182
A historical/anthropological answer might go along the lines of:\n\nHomosexuality was rife in Greek and Roman societies as it was in many other pagan societies. The early Judeans opposed Greek and Roman oppression and occupation and responded by targeting the fabric of their society by making Laws or interpreting laws (e.g. idol worship became blasphemous, homosexuality became an abomination and women were not to be treated as slaves - tho the Bible records periods when this was not the case - and some traditions continued to view women as second class citizens).\n\nThen came the Christian era.\n\nThis semi-monotheistic faith saw the bible as a pic-n-mix. One minute the Law dictated to Moses at Mount Sinai is what makes you a sinner and you dont need the Law anyway cos belief in Jesus is all that is required, the next your actions and behaviour are all important when certain things offend Paul (e.g. women and homosexuals).\n\nIf it werent for Pauline Christianity, Christianity today would either follow the Law more closely like Judaism (and thus still be a sect of Judaism) or it would have only two rules (love God and your neighbour) and no Law.\n\nThe reason for this schism is the dilemma that faced Paul. On the one hand, Paul sought to form a new religion (after his attempts to 'convert' Jews were unsuccessful) but also needed the "old" one for legitimacy (it was the one God of Israel that gave the Law at Mount Sinai, how could Paul - a mere mortal - cancel the Law of God given to man at Mount Sinai? Interestingly in the original Greek texts, one way Paul got around this was to express that he was the reincarnation of Jesus and therefore also the son of God).\n\nIf you want to read more on whether it was Jesus or Paul who invented Christianity, see the links below.\n\nFinally, I'd like to say that whatever people believe about your sexuality, it is just their belief. You should stick two fingers up to them and get on with your life. There's a reason you were created the way you were - it's just a shame these religions can't appreciate that. However, that is their limit, not yours.
974236
Jesus did not directly speak on it, that I know of.... Lest someone correct me and I be wrong.....\n\nBut, what you are looking for is found in Romans.....  Chapter 1:21-32\n\n\n24   Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: \n\n 25   Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. \n\n 26   For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: \n\n 27   And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. \n \nPLEASE NOTE:  I do not write this to condemn any but to reference a very valuable writting on the subject......\n\n\nYour sister,\nGinger
491096
Jesus was not baptized until he was a man. I thought the word "CHRISTIAN" meant follower of Christ.\n\nSorry, the baptism of children who are not at an age of accountability is a man made teaching contrary to Jesus example.\n\nThere is NO biblical record of a CHILD being baptized.
278156
No.\nJesus kept himself for the Lord. Paul writes on the topic of marriage to one of Corinthians; (1 Corinthians 7:1-7:3) "It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband." NKJV. This doesnt mean it is a sin to get married or have relationships it just means that because of our inadaquance and temptation, we are given the opposite sex to relieve temptation. See also 1 Corinthians 7:6-7. " But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment. For I wish that all men were even as myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that." Paul was single. He realized the gift that is to be able to serve God with your entire self. But marriage alike is also a gift of God. Paul recognized the gifts of celibacy and marriage. Jesus being the Son of the Living God served our Lord with his whole self. It would not be in the character of our Savior to tie himself up with a woman to suit his own carnal needs. He was able to overcome sexual temptation.\n\nAs far as "what-could-have-beens"... You cant conjure up hypothetical alternate outcomes for our Lord and Savior. He didnt become who He is by accident. It was destiny. God sent him to accomplish a purpose knowing the future already. He didnt send Him down here and cross his fingers hoping he didnt screw up.\n\n***\n\nThis is the same answer I gave last time someone asked this question.\n\n***************\n\nJust because it was in the Hebrew religion doesnt mean it was God ordained. The pharisees had all kinds of weird rules they came up with to make themselves more holy. For example: if a chicken laid an egg on the Sabbath you could eat the egg but you had to put the chicken to death for laboring on the Sabbath....
692830
Nope, Nigeria.  Sorry.  I can probably find the website though and see if South Africa is there also.\n\nhttp://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/zatoc.html\n\nThis is it!!!!  When you get to this page go to edit -> find, and then search for Christianity.  It will come up with Christianity within the phrase "The Arrival of Christianity".  It is a reliable source with the U.S. Library of Congress too. (That should make the teacher happy.)  I've been through this already because I had to write a paper on Early Christian Education in Nigeria for an English class.\n\nP.S. - Can I have 10 points, please?  And would you tell me, is this due tomorrow?\n\nAnother edit:  If you go to other links within the colonial era. (The chapters on history are at the top) you will probably find more information.
221902
Generally sex with any blood-relative 1st cousin or closer, or adopted minor is considered incest.  Incest rarely stands on its own as a charge and is generally accompanied by various other sexual or corruption criminal charges.