- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Guncher @ Nov. 22 2012,00:56) I asked a church minister the question Where are Adam and Eve at this present time
He thought that they may be in Heaven
Any thoughts?
Adam and Eve were resurrected at the dispensational role call and now serve on the council of 20 and 4 elders.Colter
Quote (david @ Nov. 25 2012,01:43) Quote (princess @ Nov. 24 2012,23:02) Quote (david @ Nov. 24 2012,12:40) Stuart. You are pretty good at discussing evolution or cosmology, but, by creating arguments such as the one you just presented, it just make's it easy for people to dismiss your other beliefs. The bible says that Adam had “sons and daughters.” Cain could have married his sister, or a neice or perhaps a grand daughter. I don't know why people always present this as some sort of argument.
Where does one start………….People present it because you either condone or condemn sleeping with your siblings. Especially when you are a practicing christian.
The story of Lot doesn't help much either.
But Cain of course was not a Christian. There was no law. And given the scenario, the situation was obviously quite a bit different than today.The story of lot isn't connected to what I WAS SAYING to stooy.
People often present the argument: “how could Cain possibly have a wife since there was just him and Abel and Seth.?”Except, the bible in that account says eve had “sons and daughters”. And, there aren't time references given.
I realize that Stuart was mocking that bible account. I was just pointing out that the doing so without an understanding of what the account actually says just makes the person look like they don't know of what they speak.
David remember the whole reason for the story of Cain and Abel, the offering to god, tend to take that as a law.David for all we know, Cain could have married his own daughter, it is a sorted mess with the whole story.
I don't know David, when the ancients married siblings to keep the blood line pure, everyone went EW! Would one be so bold to say the same for Cain.
Isn't there something in Levititus about who you are allowed to mate with and who you are not. Which even makes the story even more confusing.
I have to chuckle a bit about your last comments regarding Stuart. However it is your own to find out.
Quote Isn't there something in Levititus about who you are allowed to mate with and who you are not. Which even makes the story even more confusing. You think universally, which is great and which means you will have troubles with the bible.
Leviticus came after Cain. The law came after Cain.
If emporer X has sex with his relative 3000 years ago, and then 1500 years later, emporer F says: “no more of that,” how is that confusing.
See Stuart's image above. It is quite helpful.
Quote I have to chuckle a bit about your last comments regarding Stuart. However it is your own to find out Now this does confuse me. Has Stuart come out of the closet? Was he once a catholic monk?
Quote (david @ Nov. 26 2012,03:14) Quote Isn't there something in Levititus about who you are allowed to mate with and who you are not. Which even makes the story even more confusing. You think universally, which is great and which means you will have troubles with the bible.
Leviticus came after Cain. The law came after Cain.
If emporer X has sex with his relative 3000 years ago, and then 1500 years later, emporer F says: “no more of that,” how is that confusing.
See Stuart's image above. It is quite helpful.
God X said this then God XX said this, then God XXX said this then God XXXX son said this, then God XXXX son's XXXX said this, now how is that confusing?Not a betting woman by any means but I know a sure bet when I see one, so I would be willing to place big monies on him not being catholic or a monk.
Now the coming out of the closet comment I dont' understand could you be a bit more direct. Clear understanding and all.
Cain met his wife in the land of Nod, amoung the “Nodites”.
Adam and Eve arrived on an evolved, preveously populated earth.
The “beast” had already fallen along with the world; he was already evil and knew Gods will for the pair.
Death or the loss of imortality came to Adam and Eve specifically, not to the world. Death and or “translation” is natural.
Colter
Quote (david @ Nov. 26 2012,03:14) See Stuart's image above. It is quite helpful.
It is quite ridiculous as well.Stuart
Quote (princess @ Nov. 26 2012,10:18) God X said this then God XX said this, then God XXX said this then God XXXX son said this, then God XXXX son's XXXX said this, now how is that confusing?
Maybe one of those gods had trouble keeping up with the consequences of the mutations it had made happen in the human genome.Stuart
Quote (princess @ Nov. 26 2012,10:18) Quote (david @ Nov. 26 2012,03:14) Quote Isn't there something in Levititus about who you are allowed to mate with and who you are not. Which even makes the story even more confusing. You think universally, which is great and which means you will have troubles with the bible.
Leviticus came after Cain. The law came after Cain.
If emporer X has sex with his relative 3000 years ago, and then 1500 years later, emporer F says: “no more of that,” how is that confusing.
See Stuart's image above. It is quite helpful.
God X said this then God XX said this, then God XXX said this then God XXXX son said this, then God XXXX son's XXXX said this, now how is that confusing?
Yup. Change is confusing.But, I was just looking at the Cain story. For a moment, imagine that the bible is real and really happened the way it says. We have reasons now for looking down on incest. Back then, how was it supposed to work? If I dropped you and your brother off on mars because the earth just exploded, assuming a thousand things that make it impossible don't exist,…I realize now I should not be making this illustration personal.
There is a latin phrase or a bit of old law that says: that which is necessary is legal.
My only point in engaging stuey was to point out that he should start arguments that don't require him to look silly, as this doesn't help his credibility.
Quote (david @ Nov. 26 2012,16:16) My only point in engaging stuey was to point out that he should start arguments that don't require him to look silly, as this doesn't help his credibility.
Do you have a response to my response to that, or are you just going to carry on with the “you look silly” routine no matter what?Davey.
Stuart
Quote (Colter @ Nov. 26 2012,10:36) Cain met his wife in the land of Nod, amoung the “Nodites”.
You and your book of plagiarism seem to think Nod is a place. Do you know what Nod means?Quote Adam and Eve arrived on an evolved, preveously populated earth.
1 Corinthians 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.Acts 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.Genesis 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
Stuart
Quote (david @ Nov. 26 2012,16:16) Quote (princess @ Nov. 26 2012,10:18) Quote (david @ Nov. 26 2012,03:14) Quote Isn't there something in Levititus about who you are allowed to mate with and who you are not. Which even makes the story even more confusing. You think universally, which is great and which means you will have troubles with the bible.
Leviticus came after Cain. The law came after Cain.
If emporer X has sex with his relative 3000 years ago, and then 1500 years later, emporer F says: “no more of that,” how is that confusing.
See Stuart's image above. It is quite helpful.
God X said this then God XX said this, then God XXX said this then God XXXX son said this, then God XXXX son's XXXX said this, now how is that confusing?
Yup. Change is confusing.But, I was just looking at the Cain story. For a moment, imagine that the bible is real and really happened the way it says. We have reasons now for looking down on incest. Back then, how was it supposed to work? If I dropped you and your brother off on mars because the earth just exploded, assuming a thousand things that make it impossible don't exist,…I realize now I should not be making this illustration personal.
There is a latin phrase or a bit of old law that says: that which is necessary is legal.
My only point in engaging stuey was to point out that he should start arguments that don't require him to look silly, as this doesn't help his credibility.
Then we should take all accounts in the bible as 'let's image' and live in that moment?You are really driving Stuart's statements home with that one, he is all about the imaginary friend theory.
There is another saying 'necessity breeds invention'.
You know David the more I thought about your comment regarding my brother, the more it somewhat bothers me.
Were you being insulting to wards my brother, then boundaries have been broken. You let me know if you were just living in the moment at the time you wrote the statement. Be clear and concise.
Quote (princess @ Nov. 26 2012,22:01) You know David the more I thought about your comment regarding my brother, the more it somewhat bothers me. Were you being insulting to wards my brother, then boundaries have been broken. You let me know if you were just living in the moment at the time you wrote the statement. Be clear and concise.
Princess, I post a lot and write quickly. The obvious example was one of incest. I tend to try to make my illustrations personal, but half way through realized it may be too personal given the taboo associated with it. I didn't really even know you had a brother. Sorry if I implanted a disturbing idea in your mind.Quote (Stu @ Nov. 26 2012,18:43) Quote (david @ Nov. 26 2012,16:16) My only point in engaging stuey was to point out that he should start arguments that don't require him to look silly, as this doesn't help his credibility.
Do you have a response to my response to that, or are you just going to carry on with the “you look silly” routine no matter what?Davey.
Stuart
First, you do look silly. Second, yes.Stu. I often try to help you. I went on and on about coprolites but you didn't catch on. I am trying to teach you something but you seem intent on trying to prove something that I haven't actually been arguing.
You do look silly, and how does that help your cause?
When you create an argument that is based on a false premise, the person you are arguing, their brain shuts down, because they realize they don't need it to defeat you. And if their brain has shut down, how will you reach them? Magic beans?
Apology accepted.
Quote (david @ Nov. 27 2012,16:15) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 26 2012,18:43) Quote (david @ Nov. 26 2012,16:16) My only point in engaging stuey was to point out that he should start arguments that don't require him to look silly, as this doesn't help his credibility.
Do you have a response to my response to that, or are you just going to carry on with the “you look silly” routine no matter what?Davey.
Stuart
First, you do look silly. Second, yes.Stu. I often try to help you. I went on and on about coprolites but you didn't catch on. I am trying to teach you something but you seem intent on trying to prove something that I haven't actually been arguing.
You do look silly, and how does that help your cause?
When you create an argument that is based on a false premise, the person you are arguing, their brain shuts down, because they realize they don't need it to defeat you. And if their brain has shut down, how will you reach them? Magic beans?
Apology accepted.
No apology offered sorry. Davey.Do you have a response to what I wrote regarding Cain's wife clearly appearing by magic?
Stuart
I'm now am actually not sure if you are playing dumb or you actually don't know.
Why do you think that cains wife clearly appeared by magic? Can you explain?
(You don't have to offer an apology. I still accept it)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
