4cards
Posts: 2,551
Aug 3, 2011 9:17am
...in addition to the story of Noah, I question the whole Adam & Eve who by accounts had only two sons (Cain & Able). How did we all get here? Incest?
krambman
Posts: 3,606
Aug 3, 2011 9:25am
4cards;850553 wrote:...in addition to the story of Noah, I question the whole Adam & Eve who by accounts had only two sons (Cain & Able). How did we all get here? Incest?
Apparently you don't know your Bible very well. We know that they later had a third son named Seth, and the Bible does say that they had other sons and daughters. So yes, early on, incest would have been involved. How else would you populate a planet beginning with only two people?
I do agree though, I doubt that Adam and Eve were literally the first two people created. The creation stories in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 don't even line up very well. I think the ancients understood that the story of Adam and Eve was more allegorical about the fall of man than an actual record of historic events.
T
thavoice
Posts: 14,376
Aug 3, 2011 9:35am
The world back then seemed so much smaller because of the lack of travel and all we know of right now.
Just like when we were kids your world seemed like your neighborhood.
I believe alot of what is written about history according to religion. diff religons have some striking similiarities.
I think what happend in terms of the 'great flood' and the arc. Was there a flood? Most likely yeah. Was it a big one? Apparently. Was it the whole earth? Probably not. It coulda been a flood of epic proportions that spanned miles and miles and miles and miles. Did he bring animals? Probably so. One of each species of animal on earth taht were in existance of that time? Doubt it.
Most likely he took animals they owned, many of what they could wrangle up from their area.
To them at that time.....yeah.....it very well could have felt like the whole world was flooded
Just like when we were kids your world seemed like your neighborhood.
I believe alot of what is written about history according to religion. diff religons have some striking similiarities.
I think what happend in terms of the 'great flood' and the arc. Was there a flood? Most likely yeah. Was it a big one? Apparently. Was it the whole earth? Probably not. It coulda been a flood of epic proportions that spanned miles and miles and miles and miles. Did he bring animals? Probably so. One of each species of animal on earth taht were in existance of that time? Doubt it.
Most likely he took animals they owned, many of what they could wrangle up from their area.
To them at that time.....yeah.....it very well could have felt like the whole world was flooded
thePITman
Posts: 3,867
Aug 3, 2011 9:57am
Belief in the Bible is based on Faith, but just as much "faith" is required to believe in the theory of the big bang or millions of years of evolution. Just IMO, of course.
Anyone ever come to think that maybe there WAS a big bang, but that it was set in motion by an Almighty power as part of Creation? Hmm...
Anyone ever come to think that maybe there WAS a big bang, but that it was set in motion by an Almighty power as part of Creation? Hmm...
4cards
Posts: 2,551
Aug 3, 2011 10:06am
...I won't disagree there and if I did know it, the "non legal drugs" in the 70's elliminated that knowledge.krambman;850560 wrote:Apparently you don't know your Bible very well.
Shi+, some days I'm lucky to remember who I am!
krambman
Posts: 3,606
Aug 3, 2011 10:26am
4cards;850597 wrote:...I won't disagree there and if I did know it, the "non legal drugs" in the 70's elliminated that knowledge.
Shi+, some days I'm lucky to remember who I am!
Haha!
S
Steel Valley Football
Posts: 4,548
Aug 3, 2011 10:34am
I can believe that people actually entertain the idea that Noahs Ark is a true story. It never happened.
Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Aug 3, 2011 10:45am
Steel Valley Football;850621 wrote:I can believe that people actually entertain the idea that Noahs Ark is a true story. It never happened.
And it's a ripoff of the Gilgamesh epic's flood story, as well. Tools can't even make up their own fables.
T
Tiernan
Posts: 13,021
Aug 3, 2011 11:50am
Did Jonah get swallowed by the whale before or after Noah's deal I forget.
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Aug 3, 2011 1:15pm
Tiernan;850698 wrote:Did Jonah get swallowed by the whale before or after Noah's deal I forget.
The whale's name was Noah. Crunch that for a while.
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
Aug 3, 2011 1:26pm
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Aug 3, 2011 1:28pm
krambman;850560 wrote:Apparently you don't know your Bible very well. We know that they later had a third son named Seth, and the Bible does say that they had other sons and daughters. So yes, early on, incest would have been involved. How else would you populate a planet beginning with only two people?
I do agree though, I doubt that Adam and Eve were literally the first two people created. The creation stories in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 don't even line up very well. I think the ancients understood that the story of Adam and Eve was more allegorical about the fall of man than an actual record of historic events.
Religion is so convenient. If it doesn't make sense, justify it some other way. Enjoy mediocrity.
NNN
Posts: 902
Aug 4, 2011 1:22am
krambman;850560 wrote:Apparently you don't know your Bible very well. We know that they later had a third son named Seth, and the Bible does say that they had other sons and daughters. So yes, early on, incest would have been involved. How else would you populate a planet beginning with only two people?
Not necessarily. There could've been an additional creation in the next county over (or hundreds across the world), which wouldn't be too terribly important from a genealogical standpoint. If you're drawing up your family tree, there are spots for spouses (who come from outside the family), but not for their parents or cousins or anyone else.
Besides, "Adam and Eve" as the ultimate ancestors sounds much more rhythmic than "Clete and Maybelle".
OSH
Posts: 4,145
Aug 4, 2011 11:07am
Apparently you have no idea where "Adam" and "Eve" came from...NNN;851331 wrote:Besides, "Adam and Eve" as the ultimate ancestors sounds much more rhythmic than "Clete and Maybelle".
You do realize the Bible was not originally written in Old English, New English, etc. The "Old Testament" is known as the "Hebrew Bible" because it is in Hebrew (predominately). The "New Testament" is written in Greek (predominately). The name "Adam" is English-ized from the Hebrew word for "man, dust, mankind." The name "Eve" is English-ized from the Hebrew word for "living one."
J
jmog
Posts: 6,567
Aug 4, 2011 12:54pm
4cards;850553 wrote:...in addition to the story of Noah, I question the whole Adam & Eve who by accounts had only two sons (Cain & Able). How did we all get here? Incest?
You are incorrect, there were plenty more sons/daughters than Cain & Abel.
If you didn't know/think that in ancient times people viewed incest as "ok" and did it then you should look up your history.
tcarrier32
Posts: 1,497
Aug 4, 2011 12:57pm
[video=youtube;JcjoGn6FLwI][/video]
oh lawd jeeezuz
oh lawd jeeezuz
DeyDurkie5
Posts: 11,324
Aug 5, 2011 2:35am
jesus lol
coyotes22
Posts: 11,298
Aug 5, 2011 2:52am
They had county's back then?NNN;851331 wrote:Not necessarily. There could've been an additional creation in the next county over (or hundreds across the world), which wouldn't be too terribly important from a genealogical standpoint. If you're drawing up your family tree, there are spots for spouses (who come from outside the family), but not for their parents or cousins or anyone else.
Besides, "Adam and Eve" as the ultimate ancestors sounds much more rhythmic than "Clete and Maybelle".
NNN
Posts: 902
Aug 5, 2011 10:46am
See, all this time I'v ethought that the entire thing was written in English, then translated into various local languages of the Middle East and sent back in time to be discovered in caves. How silly of me.OSH;851525 wrote:Apparently you have no idea where "Adam" and "Eve" came from...
You do realize the Bible was not originally written in Old English, New English, etc. The "Old Testament" is known as the "Hebrew Bible" because it is in Hebrew (predominately). The "New Testament" is written in Greek (predominately). The name "Adam" is English-ized from the Hebrew word for "man, dust, mankind." The name "Eve" is English-ized from the Hebrew word for "living one."
coyotes22;852179 wrote:They had county's back then?
It's from "Inherit the Wind". I think the line was "No, it says right here that 'Cain knew his wife'. Where the hell did she come from? Was someone pullling another creation in the next county over?"
OSH
Posts: 4,145
Aug 5, 2011 1:33pm
It's amazing that some people actually feel that way though. There's only "one" Bible to read from (usually the King James). It's amazing.NNN;852340 wrote:See, all this time I'v ethought that the entire thing was written in English, then translated into various local languages of the Middle East and sent back in time to be discovered in caves. How silly of me.
There's a lot of the meaning that is lost in translation. That's the reason why I despise the NIV and sometimes the KJV (amongst others, but those are the most popular).
J
jmog
Posts: 6,567
Aug 5, 2011 2:42pm
NNN;852340 wrote:
It's from "Inherit the Wind". I think the line was "No, it says right here that 'Cain knew his wife'. Where the hell did she come from? Was someone pullling another creation in the next county over?"
If one believes the Bible then one knows that the Bible said that Adam/Eve had many other sons/daughters and Cain and Seth (other son, Abel was dead) would have had to marry their sisters.
password
Posts: 2,360
Aug 5, 2011 2:53pm
NNN;851331 wrote:Not necessarily. There could've been an additional creation in the next county over (or hundreds across the world), which wouldn't be too terribly important from a genealogical standpoint. If you're drawing up your family tree, there are spots for spouses (who come from outside the family), but not for their parents or cousins or anyone else.
Besides, "Adam and Eve" as the ultimate ancestors sounds much more rhythmic than "Clete and Maybelle".
I would think they would have known about people in other counties, all you have to do is search on google..
ricola
Posts: 855
Aug 6, 2011 9:03am
True. Many have faith to believe what the Bible says is truth; many more don't. If (when) there is an end-times judgement, those who don't/didn't believe will sure wished they had, but we all have free choice to believe what we want. (God doesn't "make"us be followers of Him --or anyone else. What would that prove?). As a Christian, personally i believe the Big Bang was how God created the universe. Science is pretty convincing of that in my mind.thePITman;850589 wrote:Belief in the Bible is based on Faith, but just as much "faith" is required to believe in the theory of the big bang or millions of years of evolution. Just IMO, of course.
Anyone ever come to think that maybe there WAS a big bang, but that it was set in motion by an Almighty power as part of Creation? Hmm...
And for the (10th?) time...it's arK
J
jmog
Posts: 6,567
Aug 6, 2011 9:53am
ricola;853219 wrote: As a Christian, personally i believe the Big Bang was how God created the universe. Science is pretty convincing of that in my mind.
And for the (10th?) time...it's arK
Actually, as a scientist, the one thing that they never tell you is that science is terrible at predicting past events (laymans terms) science is a great tool to help figure out how the world/universe is NOW, it sucks as a prediction tool for past (and future) events. There are just WAY too many "variables" to ever get it right. Evolution, Big Bang, etc are all viable theories but they are not even close to scientific fact. They are portrayed as scientific fact but that is where the problem lies.
password
Posts: 2,360
Aug 6, 2011 12:56pm
Could someone tell me, who created God?