When I was in college, many years ago, I remember my psychology professor telling us about a study that was done.  The study involved a baby that was born and was not allowed any human contact.  The length of time is went on for is gone from my memory.\nHowever, this whole thing got me to thinking, and this is where I start flipping out…\n\nImagine a baby boy and baby girl born and raised without any human contact, in a controlled environment much like the biblical Garden of Eden.  The boy would be separated from the girl.  Neither one of them would have any knowledge about the other, until they have developed in to adult hood.  At a given time they would be introduced to one another.  What is some hypothesis that could develop?  Would the two of them mate?  Would they fight?  Would they develop a language?  Most of all…would they know right from wrong?  This study would be paramount to “Playing God” and the ramifications could be immeasurable.   But, would it prove or disprove that by Adam and Eve eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil gave all humans a conscience?  Or, do humans have a conscience because it is learned from other humans, i.e. parents?
129137
it's supposed to be ask A question, not two dozen of them, lol. are you a philosophy major? ;) (if not, you might consider it....)\n\npersonally i like to believe that people innately have a sense of right and wrong, that we naturally are inclined to assume the best in others rather than go around killing and maiming. not sure that's the case, though. is it our first instinct to step on a spider? or only after we've been stung or bitten or harmed?\n\npart of me thinks that being mean is taught by other people, so maybe these two would be child-like in their curiosity and interest and willingness to assume the best in one another. or, maybe they'd be so used to fending for themselves that the self-interest gene would kick into high gear. certainly they'd be leery of another person.\n\nif morality requires empathy, and empathy is the ability to imagine yourself in the situation of others, then before they meet they aren't immoral, exactly, but rather amoral -- there's no need to know right and wrong, since there are no other people to be affected by their actions. in fact, it's hard to imagine even having a concept of yourself until there's another person to see yourself as being distinct from.\n\nin reality human contact in the earliest weeks after birth seems to be essential for moral development. children with reactive attachment disorder (from neglect or abuse or lack of nurturing) as an infant are the ones who grow up to be sociopaths, with absolutely zero regard for other people.\n\nfun stuff!
188553
The tree did not give us free will, we already had it, otherwise Eve would not have been able to make the choice of disobeying and eating from it in the first place. We were given free will so that we could love God by choice. Love by force would not really be love. Every time I see this question, though, the tree is almost always called "The Tree of Knowledge" rather than by its actual name. This is an important oversight if you are to understand.\n\nIt's the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil - a specific kind of knowledge, not ALL knowledge (something I think we can agree we do not have). Before Adam and Eve ate the fruit, they knew nothing but good because that is how they were originally created. When Eve ate of the tree, she had already sinned by disobeying God. Then, on top of that she introduced a knowledge of evil into her mind (as did Adam). As humans we are not able to resist evil completely. This is why God told them not to eat of the tree, because He knew that if they did, they would be tempted for the rest of their lives by the evil thoughts, ideas, and so forth that would be introduced by eating the fruit. He knew that we would not be able to resist evil all the time. So, He told them not to eat, but created them with the ability to make the choice themselves.\n\nWhen Adam and Eve ate of the tree, their minds were corrupted. This was passed on to their children and all other descendents in their blood and by their influence. \n\nHad they chose not to eat, they would still have had the knowledge of all that was good. God talked and walked in the garden with them, wanting to be close to them. They chose to try to "know as much as God", which was nothing more than the deception of the devil.
170155
Kinda prejudiced in the way you asked, dontcha think?  :-)\n\nThe story of Adam and Eve is a parable.  I don't expect it was meant literally even by the people who wrote it.  I feel very sorry for the small-minded people who have to have the story be "true" in order to see any value to it.\n\nEvery human on the planet has a gene that, if it worked, would make us as furry as chimpanzees are.  It doesn't work, it has a transposon (a type of genetic parasite) stuck in it.  Without that transposon, we'd all have to pay a lot more for shampoo every month!\n\nSo, the question before the creationists is, wherefore doth we have it?  Did God create us with a broken gene, complete with parasite, that we don't even want?  Or were Adam and Eve furry?  So far, I've only found one creationist willing to accept that Adam and Eve were hirsute people.\n\nThere are a thousand arguments like this.  To date, creationists flee in terror from all of them, while presenting the same old, tired, long refuted nonsense in support for their cause.  They cannot explain the pattern of genetic similarity.  They cannot explain how the Great Flood hasn't left the entire surface of the earth salt-infused and sterile.  They cannot explain how any species more complicated than a protozoa survived the flood.  They've got nothing.\n\nResponding to some of the nothing they have:\n\nPopulation Growth:\n\nAssuming a constant rate of population growth is simply naive and silly.  We *know* the population growth hasn't been constant.  Remember the black death?  60% of Europe *died*.  That's not growth!\n\nIf we apply the same argument to fruit flies, we find that the entire earth is covered in fruit flies in a matter of days.  Funny how that hasn't happened.  It's almost as if populations do not experience continuous growth because limits are set by the environment!\n\nAnother fun fact about the constant population growth argument:  If it's true, the Bible LIES!  After all, at the time of Exodus, it says more people left Egypt than existed on earth at the time!\n\nSo, dump the rather silly population growth argument.\n\nDinosaurs:\n\nThere are NO human fossils found with dinosaur fossils.  Not a single one.  You're welcome to point out a specific exception.  There are three sites showing "human" and dinosaur footprints, but Paluxy is a product of wishful thinking and some faking by townsfolk hoping to get more tourist dollars (they admitted this) and the other two (Tuba City and some site in Russia I don't remember) are just really bad fakes.\n\nDinosaurs are not lizards.  Let a lizard grow forever and it will not turn into anything resembling a dinosaur.  This is one of Carl Baugh's silly claims and it causes nothing but ridicule for creationists.  Lizards belong to the suborder Laertes.  They have sprawling legs.  A large lizard has large sprawling legs.  Dinosaurs have legs better mounted. Small dinosaurs have smaller legs.  Small dinosaurs cannot be mistaken for lizards.  (Well, if you're utterly ignorant about biology, I suppose they could.)\n\n(At least Baugh stopped claiming that breathing pure ozone would help you live for hundreds of years, despite the fact that ozone is explosive and poisonous!  But since when has a creationist needed to understand a subject before making declarations about it.) \n\nSea monsters as evidence?  Gee, now that's desperate.  I'm sure you'll present the physical evidence that dinosaurs were fire-breathing next, right?  Sheesh!\n\nOh, and carbon dating has not been "proven wrong".  Not that it matters.  There are thousands of different dating systems.  Carbon dating, by the way, only works on organic materials:  NOT FOSSILS.  Dinosaur fossils are NEVER dated by carbon dating.  So, you're wrong.  Again.\n\nLaw of Angular Momentum:\n\nUm... because other collisions happen?  I know, stunning!\n\nReally dumb argument.\n\nHistoric
253662
Let me give you something to think about. \n\nAccording to the Bible, God is all knowing, right? \n\nWhen he told Adam & Eve, "Do whatever you want, but don't eat fruit from that tree," he knew that Adam & Eve would be snacking on that fruit in due time. How do I know this? God is all knowing. \n\nSo, if God is all knowing, and he knew they'd eat from the tree, why was he so ticked off? HE KNEW THEY'D EAT FROM THE TREE.\n\nEither God is one angry, irrational, and illogical being, or he's not all knowing. If he's not all knowing, what other flaws does he have? \n\nConsider the Garden of Eden as allegory, and that changes the dynamic of the question. Given a choice between a blissful but ignorant life, or a difficult but knowledgeable life, I'd choose knowledge. However, I would really kick myself for not staying dumb and happy. Human nature, what can you do? \n\n(The Matrix movies are a great example of choosing Eden or choosing reality. Overall, I think humans want to know the truth of things.)
347320
a child is created in his/her parents image, a gene from each  shapes the child, they decide the action that starts the creation, but yet a child  for the most part, is not equal to the parent,,,,\n\nand please dont classify all believers or even all believers in Jesus, into one group lol  i do both, yet are not christian
3224
ofcourse nice question ... and this leads us to another question ...\n\nWhat was Adam's and Eve's DNA!!?\n\nJesus is like Adam ... No earthly or non-earthly father ... he is a messenger that God created from nothing just like he created Adam and Eve!
69724
First of all, we don't know what fruit it was.  The Bible never says an apple.  Second of all, if Adam and Eve hadn't eaten of the forbidden fruit they would have never become mortal and had children.  We would not even be here today, only Adam and Eve would still be livingin the Garden of Eden.  So Eve's partaking of the forbidden fruit, from the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the most wonderful thing that could have ever taken place.  Without Eve's actions you wouldn't be sitting in front of a computer terminal asking this question.
18652
There is NOTHING more important. I have heard that if a baby is given proper nutrition and kept at the proper temperature, but is deprived of human contact in all forms, the baby will become ill and likely die.  Human contact is a need that is primary to all of us.  I have worked in institutions with children who had been abused in horrible ways by their parent.  Yet, when the parent would come for a visit, the child would run to them.  If I could tell you the types of torture these children had endured from these parents (which I can't) you would be amazed that the child would run to them instead of away from them.  There is something about the bond between a child and a parent that is supernatural.  Parents are the key factor for most children's success in education.  Take 2 children of similar intelligence and send them to school.  The one with parents who take an interest in the child's education will far out perform the child with parents who don't pay attention.  Some might argue that it is simply because the interested parents are reviewing educational material with the child, but this is only part of the answer.  If the second child were to have tutors for the equal amount of time, the results would still favor the child with involved parents.  I have seen many times that children who sware they will never be like their parents grow up to be exactly like them.  In particular I had a childhood friend whose father was alcoholic.  At times it would be so bad that the boy and his mother would show up at our doorstep in the middle of the night.  We spent a lot of time together in a treehouse talking about life.  He stuttered and some other kids made fun of him, but I never did.  He swore he would never be like his father.  The boy grew up to follow in his father's footsteps.  The last time I saw him he was a miserable alcoholic.  Could he have chosen a different route?  I believe he could, but he didn't, and along with being sad, I think it is amazing.  Parents are our first and most important role models.  There must be something about us that makes us believe that we can be just like them.  We may THINK and HOPE we can be different, but we KNOW we can be the same.  How many doctors or lawyers do you know who came from families that had a parent as a doctor or lawyer.  Look at hollywood, lots of actors come from actor families.  Do we HAVE to become our parents?  NO! but it is amazing that it is such a struggle not to.
358854
Sounds like you've been watching "Inherit the Wind" one too many times.\n\nThe answer of course is that the Bible is not the complete account of all of Adam and Eve's family.  We know that Adam was the first flesh on the earth, and undoubtedly he had several children, two of which married.  There is nothing too scandelous about this considering that there were not too many choices originally.\n\nThose fanatic born again Bible bashers who claim the Bible is totally complete and contains ALL of God's words forget one thing----The Bible itself never makes this claim.  Whey then should they--unless their belief system is non-Biblical (which it is.)
469711
I would ask you to pull out the Bible that it appears you're already a little familiar with. Notice. It does NOT say that Adam and Eve were the ONLY people God created, just the first. Two points:\n\nA) Cain took a wife after he killed Abel... Hmm... The only woman on Earth at the time that the Bible tells about is Eve... Where did he get his wife? (God made other individuals elsewhere).\n\nB) When God banished Cain from the garden, he said that people would surely find him and kill him, wherever he went... If his mom and dad and brothers and sisters were the only people God had created, what was he afraid of???\n\nTo your second notion, the Ages... The Bible REPEATEDLY says that God's time is not like our time and that a second to God could be a million years here on Earth. Isaiah is the best example. "My ways are not like the ways of man." Meaning, simply, that God doesn't operate the same way we do.\n\nIn summation, it is quite simple for Christians to believe in both Creation and Evolution... You just have to be willing to do your homework...
501747
well, there ya go.  what kind of parent would put the crayon drawing made by one of their children up on the frig but not the drawing made by the other?  wouldn't the obvious effect of such favoritism be sibling rivalry?   that Bible god seemed to get some kind of twisted enjoyment out of setting his pet humans against each other.   \n\npoor Cain.  he wasn't Abel.
318261
If Adam and Eve were real, then wouldn't we all be sinners since we are all related and having sex?...We are not born sinners we are raised and instilled with morals and a value system. (Nature-Nurture)
230587
I'm a Christian and I am not "opposed to gay people". But when you tell me these two things then I have to respond in what I hope is a compassionate manner.\n\n"The discovery that some of us are created and/or shaped in our earliest infancy toward same-gender attraction was made in the last 150 years."\n\nThat may or may not be true although for the sake of discussion let's say that it is. Many people have a tendency towards a particular form of behavior. When they get old enough to make mature decisions they have to decide whether that behavior is beneficial or not and since we are talking about God, whether that behavior is in His will for their life or not.\n\nSome people seem to be born with a terrible temper and are prone to violent behavior. They either end up controling their urges or they reap the consequences of giving in to them. It could be a struggle that they have for their entire life and one that they cannot always win. Hopefully they don't commit murder or just give up and make themselves a menace to those with whom they come into contact.\n\nJust because homosexuality isn't exactly the same doesn't mean that there are not legitimate parallels. Someone who finds themself attracted to members of the same sex still makes a choice about how they are going to deal with that emotion just like someone who is prone to anger.\n\nWhen you talk about not bringing up the "Adam and Steve" argument I have to go outside of the guidlines you want to impose on this discussion. It is apparent from the command God gave to Adam and Eve to go forth and multiply that He created men to have sex with women for the purpose of procreation. God also made sex an enjoyable encounter between two people as an added bonus. So where does that leave today's "Adam" if he is not attracted to any of the "Eves" in this world but instead finds himself attracted to the "Steves" around him?\n\nThe book of Corinthians provides at least one answer to that question and Jesus spoke of another for those who were able to receive it.\n\n1 Corinthians 6:9  Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,  (10)  nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.  (11)  And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.  (12)  "All things are lawful for me," but not all things are helpful. "All things are lawful for me," but I will not be enslaved by anything.  (13)  "Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food"--and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.\n\nIn this passage the Apostle Paul is speaking to relatively new believers who have been born again by the Holy Spirit. He talks about how some of them USED to be things like drunkards and men who practice homosexuality.\n\nWhen I came to Christ at age 43 I had been a drunkard for many years and had developed a chemical addiction to alcohol. I haven't had a drink since a short time before becoming a Christian but it was a real struggle for me until I was born again. That doesn't mean that I'm never tempted to drink or that I've lost the desire to have a cold beer on a hot day but it does mean that now I have supernatural assistance to overcome my struggle.\n\nI don't go around telling people about how Jesus made wine for the guests at a wedding and how I would be justified in drinking since it's not illegal and doesn't hurt anyone else. Instead I know that it's not in God's will for my life to drink alcohol and so I consistently make the choice every day of my life
609998
Yes!  Awsome, isn't it?\n\nBut you know, Eve was created in God's image, too.  See Genesis 1:26-27.  The difference is, God made Adam from the earth and Eve from a pre-existing created source.\n\nIn an interesting reversal of Eve's creation, Jesus' human body was created from a pre-existing created source (Mary) and the Holy Spirit.  This is one of many reasons why He would later be referred to as the "Second Adam."\n\nAlthough we were created from two pre-existing sources (our parents), when we are Born Again, that "old man" dies and we are born anew.  Then, when we are called up to God's presence (by the Rapture or after death), we are perfected and created anew.\n\nMy view of the sequence is:\n\nGod>>Adam\nGod + Adam>>Eve\nHoly Spirit + Eve>>Jesus (the Second Adam)\nMom + Dad>>You\nHoly Spirit + You>>Born Again You\nGod + Born Again You>>Perfected You
280526
Wow:  Thanks for the info about the DNA.  For those readers that wondered how the world comes into being without God creating what He alone is able and willing, such info as the DNA, let alone the rest of the whole complex of Created mass and masterpieces, it rests on this issue.  You see, you think, and you understand.  OR you see, and refuse to see, you think and you refuse to think, and you refuse to understand.  Part of that matter of Free choice.  The simple fact is, what you choose to believe is also part of the gift you were given in Creation.  You believe or not, and amazing, it gives you a part in the rest of the community.  There are adequate numbers of unbelievers, that will all affirm your faithlessness, just as there are adequate numbers of believers who will affirm your believe in pagan cult, just as there are adequate numbers of believers in Islam, or Christianity or any other form religion.  Numbers however, doesnt affirm factuallity.  Flat world theorists believe it.  Round world hanging in space believe it.  Sun circling the earth believers affirm it, as do earth circling the sun believers affirm their bit of observation.  \n   Did Noach go searching for the animals?  No, the Text says, according to Moses, affirming that GOd instructed him to write, that God caused the animals to come to the ark.  Noachs job was to build it and stock it with grain and grass, as all the animals would eat vegetarian while aboard, including Noach and family.  Is that possible?  Depends on how you view and believe.  Impossible for those who refuse to believe that GOD was involved.  Possible for those that choose to believe in such miracle process or natural process.   It is all amazing, no matter what you believe.  If you believe God created, thats amazing.  From my point of view thats acceptable.  What would be more amazing is to try to figure out how all this world in all its complexity came into being without a Creator God, since it is obviously more complex than any human can contrive.  Heck,,,we cant even create a blade of grass from nothing, let alone a human eye..or the rest of a human being.\n   The story of the group of scientists who were all working on a grand assignment, to duplicate life...and one day they all agreed, they had done it.  Accomplished the grand impossible,  they had developed a life form in a petri dish.   Eureka they shouted...we did it.  We dont need GOD any more.   THEN GOD SAID :  Now, try it without anything:  No dirt, no fire, no water, no air and no petri dish.
109772
I don't think that this should determine or have any effect on the question of morality here.  The fact is that natural childbirth can cause tearing, sometimes very severe tearing.
307598
Let's do a quick thought experiment.\n\nIf I cut off your thumb, would your children be missing a thumb?\n\nNo?  Then maybe Adam was missing a rib, but why would all of his descendants be missing one too?