The (Creationist’s) Problem of Incest.

Yeah, I went there. I didn’t really set out looking for it, but you know how the internet is. In a quest for some funny creationist images to share with you all, I came across this old response (because 2010 is like, a million years ago) to a common question that creationists face. You know, that whole problem of all the hot, steamy sibling sex between Adam and Eve’s children that the Bible thankfully doesn’t expound upon.

Everyone’s (except for veggies like me) favorite egg accompaniment, Ken Ham, tackles this important question in his usual “I don’t know so here’s some shit I made up” fashion. And by tackles I mean side-steps and avoids actually resolving. Green Eggs and Ham states that (emphasis added):

…way back then (about 6,000 years ago) close relatives could marry — they had to in order to start their own families. Even Abraham married his half-sister. Of course, we can’t do that anymore because of the effects of sin on our bodies

I really like that last bit coming from a guy who believes that sin entered the world immediately before the birth of Cain, completely contradicting his half-assed logic. All right, it’s more like quarter-assed. It makes me wonder what other effects sin has on our bodies. I mean, if I fart in an elevator and everyone gets pissed at me, can I just claim that it’s the result of sin on my body?

Lastly, I want you to try to follow my illogic here. If incest is bad because of sin and there was no sin in the Garden of Eden, does that mean that incest was good before “the Fall”? Also, does this mean that Mr. Hamsteak thinks that Heaven is going to be full of incest? I think I need to floss my brain now.

Speak Your Mind