Humanities desk
< May 16	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 18 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 17

Adam, Eve and Incest

Did the children of Adam and Eve marry their own siblings? Did the children of Adam and Eve commit incest?

Inkonvin (talk) 06:34, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incest is not usually treated the same way in fiction as in real life. Consult the original Author for further information.DOR (HK) (talk) 07:08, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most mainstream Christians follow an allegorical interpretation of the Bible rather than Biblical literalism which is a feature of Christian fundamentalists. For those that believe the literal truth of the Creation narrative, I found this article which basically says that they did commit incest but it was acceptable because "Adam and Eve’s immediate offspring would have been very close to physical perfection". Judaism and Islam have their own spectrum of interpretation on this issue, see Jewish views on evolution and Islamic views on evolution. Alansplodge (talk) 11:05, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are two different (and somewhat contradictory) creation stories in the first couple chapters of Genesis. So it depends which one you believe. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:36, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The text seems to apply that they were humans living outside of Eden before the fall. It should also be noted that "Adam" is often written in plural, as in "men" (https://books.google.ch/books?id=VVJbDAAAQBAJ&pg=PP7&dq=Genesis+kommentar&hl=de&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjhooeziLvpAhW-xMQBHUlqCCAQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=Genesis%20kommentar&f=false). So the text itself could possibly describe several humans instead of a single person.--2A02:1205:5049:A1D0:9D4C:BDE9:A6B2:F953 (talk) 14:04, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, the Hebrew word 'Adam' is often used collectively and can be translated as 'mankind' or sometimes 'men'. However, it is grammatically singular and is never written as a plural form in the Hebrew Bible. - Lindert (talk) 16:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you (2A02) point to a chapter and verse that implies that there were humans living outside of Eden before the fall? --Lambiam 12:49, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The tradition so noted comes from the double creation myth of people, the fact that there are two human creation events, the first in Genesis 1:27-31 (the second half of the sixth day), and THEN in Genesis 2:4-24 a completely different creation story with a different chronology exists. The explicit order of events in the two narrations do not line up, which has led different traditions to develop different ways to make them line up by "filling in the blanks" as it were. While most mainstream Judeo-Christian traditions take the tradition that the second story is an elaboration or clarification on the first story, this is not the only possible interpretation; there are other equally valid (from the point of view of "as consistent with the existing text" rather than "actually orthodox belief according to a specific tradition") interpretations that could allow for a multiple creation event, where Adam and Eve were created as people to inhabit Eden, while the other creation event caused the earth to be populated by other people. The Lilith story is one that arises from one of these "fill in the blank" methods, for example, that holds that Lilith was created in the 1:27-31 narrative, and Eve in the 2:4-24 narrative. --Jayron 32 13:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think this implication comes mainly from Genesis 4, where Cain is punished by God after killing his brother. He responds to God in 4:14 Behold, you have driven me today away from the ground, and from your face I shall be hidden. I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.”. Apparently he was afraid of other people, even though it would seem that his parents were the only other people alive at that time (that are mentioned). Also, the story goes on to say that he went east and there fathered a child with his wife and founded a city. - Lindert (talk) 16:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This question is usually presented in the form "Where did Abel get his wife?" This [1] seems comprehensive. 86.179.121.164 (talk) 16:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, and to answer the OP's question, he committed incest. HiLo48 (talk) 22:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Afford Insurance

What if you can't afford insurance?

Inkonvin (talk) 09:03, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What type of insurance? House, Contents, Car, Medical, Life … ? LongHairedFop (talk) 09:26, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you genuinely can't afford insurance, what possessions would you own that are still worth insuring? Generally speaking, how would a person who can't afford to insure his/her possessions, still have valuable possessions? If you rent your home rather than owning it, for example, insuring the home itself would be the job of the landlord (via Landlords' insurance), not you. Note, though, that landlords' insurance usually does not cover the tenant's possessions.

Likewise, if you're poor, your car (if you even own one) is likely to be not particularly valuable (and thus, not worth insuring). That said, even if your car is an old rattletrap (and thus not worth insuring), you still DO have a need for third-party insurance and/or liability insurance (there is some overlap between the two).

EDIT: I'd assumed that the question was about insuring possessions or real-estate. Others may wish to address the issue of other types of insurance, (life, TPD, health, etc), where my argument doesn't apply. 2001:8003:52A0:100:992B:BEB0:DF9F:34B0 (talk) 12:29, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a real question that arises every time there are major bushfires in Australia that cause thousands of people to lose their homes. Many ARE privately owned, but uninsured. Governments step in to assist those who have lost everything, but the debate always arises as to how much more help the uninsured people deserve. No satisfactory answer to the question has ever been found. HiLo48 (talk) 23:18, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It always amazes me when I see vision of people standing amid the ashes of their former home, bewailing that they weren't insured and have lost the lot. Why wasn't home insurance their top priority? What could they have done without in order to afford it? I'd be ashamed to tell the world that I chose not to insure my house. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC) [reply]

To insure, or not, is a gamble. Kind of like going without a mask during a pandemic. [You probably won't get bit, but if you do, it's too late.] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:49, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the OP didn't specify any particular jurisdiction and I'm not convinced all actually require some form of compulsory vehicle insurance. Our article suggests Ireland allows an exemption if you have a deposit with the High Court. NZ only has the standard no-fault personal injury insurance albeit with a special account for motor accidents paid for by licencing and fuel levies. (South Africa appears to have a wider system exclusively for road accidents.) While none of these are nothing, I wouldn't be completely surprised if there's at least one without a requirement. Nil Einne (talk) 20:06, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See Self-insurance, which is basically taking a chance that any losses will be of lesser value than what might have been paid as insurance premiums. DOR (HK) (talk) 12:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some people may be under water, having already taken a second mortgage, working three minimum wage jobs, and still unable to afford insurance. Then, if disaster strikes, it is your punishment for being poor. --Lambiam 11:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]