1. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Quarantined World
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    87415
    25 Jan '15 00:04
    Originally posted by Paul Dirac II
    Radio's "Bible Answer Man" Hank Hanegraaf says it about like this: Adam and Eve had perfect DNA. After the Fall, DNA remained pretty darned good for generations, and near-perfect DNA allows inbreeding of siblings without producing crummy offspring. DNA got worse from generation to generation, such that at some point the Lord outlawed incest.

    Don't shoot me; I'm just the messenger. 🙂
    Biologically that almost makes sense, if there are no deleterious alleles then it wouldn't be a problem, but cell division is not a perfect process and copying errors would creep in before the population was big enough for it not to be a problem. Having said that the ancient Egyptian Dynasties managed to last up to ten generations despite marrying their sisters almost every generation. It's fun to look at the family tree of the Ptolemaic dynasty - it's more of a family Ptotem pole!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemaic_Kingdom#Simplified_Ptolemaic_family_tree
  2. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    12351
    25 Jan '15 02:512 edits
    Originally posted by Paul Dirac II
    Radio's "Bible Answer Man" Hank Hanegraaf says it about like this: Adam and Eve had perfect DNA. After the Fall, DNA remained pretty darned good for generations, and near-perfect DNA allows inbreeding of siblings without producing crummy offspring. DNA got worse from generation to generation, such that at some point the Lord outlawed incest.

    Don't shoot me; I'm just the messenger. 🙂
    My only issue with that explanation is that God called referred to sibling incest (along with other types of close relations) as "detestable". It would be one thing if God simply said incest can't continue for practical reasons; but the word "detestable" implies a deep rooted moral opposition to it.

    So Hanagraaf's expansion just seems like cleverly contrived BS., rather than something he really believes.
  3. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    25 Jan '15 03:24
    Originally posted by vivify
    My only issue with that explanation is that God called referred to sibling incest (along with other types of close relations) as "detestable". It would be one thing if God simply said incest can't continue for practical reasons; but the word "detestable" implies a deep rooted moral opposition to it.

    So Hanagraaf's expansion just seems like cleverly contrived BS., rather than something he really believes.
    If incest was detestable to God, the question that needs to be answered is when did it become detestable to God and why? Also if it was detestable from the beginning was procreation supposed to be carried out only by Adam and Eve and why did God wait so long to tell somebody? If it became detestable later, then what happened that made it detestable?
  4. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    25 Jan '15 17:355 edits
    Originally posted by vivify
    My only issue with that explanation is that God called referred to sibling incest (along with other types of close relations) as "detestable". It would be one thing if God simply said incest can't continue for practical reasons; but the word "detestable" implies a deep rooted moral opposition to it.

    So Hanagraaf's expansion just seems like cleverly contrived BS., rather than something he really believes.
    "...the word "detestable" implies a deep rooted moral opposition to it."

    Incest became seen as immoral to the degree that it damaged the tribe and to the degree it was realized that it damaged the tribe. This would happen in species capable of developing moral systems, since moral systems exist in part to enhance tribal integrity. In all species, unconscious mechanisms for limiting such damage could come about, by weeding out defective offspring that would otherwise be prone to incest, in favor of offspring that were prone to find less closely related mates.

    Edit: This could fit into a creationist model as the way that God did it.
  5. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    12351
    25 Jan '15 17:57
    Originally posted by JS357
    "...the word "detestable" implies a deep rooted moral opposition to it."

    Incest became seen as immoral to the degree that it damaged the tribe and to the degree it was realized that it damaged the tribe. This would happen in species capable of developing moral systems, since moral systems exist in part to enhance tribal integrity. In all speci ...[text shortened]... sely related mates.

    Edit: This could fit into a creationist model as the way that God did it.
    But this argument wouldn't apply to an allegedly all-knowing god, would it?
  6. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    25 Jan '15 18:08
    Originally posted by vivify
    But this argument wouldn't apply to an allegedly all-knowing god, would it?
    I think the problems some see with the alleged omni-qualities of God arise no matter how God did it.
  7. Joined
    28 Aug '10
    Moves
    5920
    25 Jan '15 19:05
    Q: Psalm 114 speaks of hills and mountains dancing and skipping like lambs. Are creation geologists working on a theory to explain how a mountain can dance? Or have they evolved the ability to recognize poetry when they see it?
    A: Obviously this Psalm is not intended literally, nor are verses such as Luke 3:11, where we are instructed to give our stuff away.
    Q: Is the formation of Eve from Adam's rib intended to be read literally?
    A: Yes, obviously.
  8. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    25 Jan '15 19:57
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    General answer to all questions: God moves in mysterious ways.
    god has a plan
  9. Joined
    28 Aug '10
    Moves
    5920
    25 Jan '15 21:27
    Q: Does Intelligent Design maintain that the Universe was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
    A: No. Pastafarians have read far too much into this. ID has merely said that the Creator "may have been" the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
  10. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    116436
    25 Jan '15 21:451 edit
    Originally posted by catstorm
    All of my Q and A are taken from genuine creationist literature.
    To claim such, you really should post the link.
  11. Joined
    28 Aug '10
    Moves
    5920
    25 Jan '15 21:49
    Yes, you are quite right. I will go back and do that.
  12. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    116436
    25 Jan '15 21:54
    Originally posted by catstorm
    Yes, you are quite right. I will go back and do that.
    Thank you brother; peace and serenity be with you.
  13. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    26 Jan '15 04:45
    Originally posted by vivify
    Q: If God wants us to be fruitful and multiply, why did he make childbirth so difficult and painful, that many women and children have died from labor complications?

    A: ........
    A. Genesis 3:16-17 "16 To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply Your pain [a]in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.” 17 Then to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it; cursed is the ground because of you; In [b]toil you will eat of it All the days of your life." "Footnotes: a.Genesis 3:16 Lit and your pregnancy, conception; b.Genesis 3:17 Or sorrow." (NASB) Because of disobedience to one command.
  14. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    26 Jan '15 04:47
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    General answer to all questions: God moves in mysterious ways.
    Well phrased answer to many of the questions posed to date..
  15. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    26 Jan '15 04:57
    Originally posted by catstorm
    I am not ridiculing anyone's faith. All of my Q and A are taken from genuine creationist literature.
    Both of these fibs rather undermine the humour of this material! 😉
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree