3 edits
Originally posted by 667joeoh Jo Jo, when are you gonna give up trying to find holes in the inspired word of God. Actually Adam and Eve had sons AND, please note this, AND Daughters, although they are not specifically mentioned by name.
Adam and Eve had Cain and Abel. (Cain killed Abel) Cain, however, went on to marry and had a son named Enoch. The Question is, where did Cain's wife come from.? The bible does not mention her as a child of Adam and Eve. Something is wrong here!
(Genesis 5:4) . . .And the days of Adam after his fathering Seth came to be eight hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters. . .
are we to conclude that after having been married to a perfect woman for eight hundred years that he did not father a plethora of children? with no contraception, and no chess and no T.V. and all the time in the world? because she is termed his wife and not a daughter of Adam and Eve is no cause for concern, for she is simply known by her new status, as wife rather than a daughter, if indeed, that was the case.
So, in your view, Enoch was a product of incest. If incest was OK then, why is it not OK now. (Of course my view is god did not create Adam and Eve or talking snakes!) People might have lived 800 moons, but it is highly unlikely that any human being ever lived 800 years. Six thousand years ago, if people lived to be 35 or 40, they were doing very well.
3 edits
Originally posted by 667joeoh Jo Jo, its a very old argument, and i was gonna put a clause in just in case you decided to broach the subject.
So, in your view, Enoch was a product of incest. If incest was OK then, why is it not OK now. (Of course my view is god did not create Adam and Eve or talking snakes!) People might have lived 800 moons, but it is highly unlikely that any human being ever lived 800 years. Six thousand years ago, if people lived to be 35 or 40, they were doing very well.
WAS CAIN’S MARRIAGE “INCEST”?
Was God fostering what is now called “incest” by arranging matters so that the first children of Adam would marry one another—brothers marrying sisters? No. For, in Adam’s original perfect state his children would have been born in perfection. (Deut. 32:4) There would have been no family weaknesses to be passed on and accentuated by the marriage of near relatives, as is the case today, when the sinful human race has greatly deteriorated and many genetic defects exist. Even after Adam had sinned, his descendants lived as long as 969 years in the days before the Flood.—Gen. 5:27.
Accordingly, it took a long time for genetic defects to become so numerous and so grouped in family lines that it became dangerous to the offspring for close relatives to marry. Even Abraham, some 2,000 years after the creation of Adam, married his half sister. (Gen. 20:12) Not until God gave the Mosaic law (about 500 years later) did He prohibit close family marriage unions among the people of Israel.—Lev. 18:6-18.
It is a wonderful arrangement of God that he made mankind one race, with one origin. All can have the same benefits from the atonement sacrifice of Jesus Christ. (1 Tim. 2:5, 6) All can approach God through this One as their “Eternal Father” and can come to have the same relationship as “children of God.” (Isa. 9:6; Rom. 8:21) Under Christ’s rulership humankind will again be one. (Eph. 1:9, 10) All national, ethnic, political and social barriers or boundaries will be permanently wiped out, bringing about the purpose that God had from the very beginning.—1 Cor. 15:24, 28.
Also as your failure highlights one must understand that being closer to perfection, genetic defects such as ageing did not occur as rapidly as they do today, thus answering your other question , and lastly Jo Jo, snakes do not talk, it was merely an illusion, as when a ventriloquist throws his voice to make it appear that an inanimate 'dummy', is speaking. i really thought that this was understood, apparently not.
Give up the way of the Sith, become a Jedi, Jo Jo, it is your destiny!
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI am left speechless.
oh Jo Jo, its a very old argument, and i was gonna put a clause in just in case you decided to broach the subject.
WAS CAIN’S MARRIAGE “INCEST”?
Was God fostering what is now called “incest” by arranging matters so that the first children of Adam would marry one another—brothers marrying sisters? No. For, in Adam’s original perfect state his ch ...[text shortened]... ood, apparently not.
Give up the way of the Sith, become a Jedi, Jo Jo, it is your destiny!
2 edits
Originally posted by kirksey957no no my American cousin, this is no place for speechlessness, this is the spirituality forum, where any type of opinion, may be heard and examined as to its validity. Have i offended you again? have i taken anything out of context? Is there a biblical reference that has been misconstrued? what is on your mind?
I am left speechless.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou are such a learned scholar, I'd like to hear your explanation of how Jonah lived in the whale for 3 days.
oh Jo Jo, its a very old argument, and i was gonna put a clause in just in case you decided to broach the subject.
WAS CAIN’S MARRIAGE “INCEST”?
Was God fostering what is now called “incest” by arranging matters so that the first children of Adam would marry one another—brothers marrying sisters? No. For, in Adam’s original perfect state his ch ...[text shortened]... ood, apparently not.
Give up the way of the Sith, become a Jedi, Jo Jo, it is your destiny!
1 edit
Originally posted by 667joeare you kidding, learned scholar, haha, are you not thinking of Jaywill??? or Conrau, or Epiphaneas, or Lord shark? or Freaky, oh Jo Jo, now you want an explanation for a divine miracle, ok, but can it wait, for it is 5 am here and i need sleep.
You are such a learned scholar, I'd like to hear your explanation of how Jonah lived in the whale for 3 days.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI transcend this forum. I am speechless.
no no my American cousin, this is no place for speechlessness, this is the spirituality forum, where any type of opinion, may be heard and examined as to its validity. Have i offended you again? have i taken anything out of context? Is there a biblical reference that has been misconstrued? what is on your mind?
i disagree with the reasoning from my learned college. cain was marked so he would not be killed by other humans. so his family would not have killed him. so other humans must have been on earth [yes they had other children] so god must have , had earth before the fall of adam and watched over the creation hence the dinos etc
Originally posted by stokerthen you must 'make with the readies', my dear Stoker and substantiate your claims!
i disagree with the reasoning from my learned college. cain was marked so he would not be killed by other humans. so his family would not have killed him. so other humans must have been on earth [yes they had other children] so god must have , had earth before the fall of adam and watched over the creation hence the dinos etc
Originally posted by robbie carrobiethe fossals etc say the earth is quite old. since i can not dismiss this i enbrace it, similar to the earth going round the sun not as many thought some time ago. Beliving that we were centre of universe. I understand thier belief from thier view.
then you must 'make with the readies', my dear Stoker and substantiate your claims!
Now we have the extra sience at our disposal we must learn to use what truth we have still beliveing but not without question of.. as god is truth not lies.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRobbie is actually right in this.
Was God fostering what is now called “incest” by arranging matters so that the first children of Adam would marry one another—brothers marrying sisters? No. For, in Adam’s original perfect state his children would have been born in perfection. (Deut. 32:4) There would have been no family weaknesses to be passed on and accentuated by the marriage of n ...[text shortened]... ad sinned, his descendants lived as long as 969 years in the days before the Flood.—Gen. 5:27.
At this time, humans was so perfect in their genetic purity so women didn't even need men to be impregnated, it's enough with another woman to have children. Even men could have children with eachother with no woman present. The times was beautiful!
Nowadays people are so degenerate so for us to have a child, we have to have one man and one woman, blend the DNA in order to take the best part of each, to have a conception. Mary was actually the last one who didn't need a man to have a child, and what a child she produced!
This is true, because I heard it from a christian, and therefore it must be true! And the bible doesn't say otherwise.