Who is 'Us' ?

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
From: King James version Genesis 1:26

Also...who did Cain and Seth marry?

**Don't mind me...I'm reacting to a call that I just got from an 'alternative' church trying to recruit priests by sneakily calling and asking simple questions about the Bible and then trying to trick people into seeing things their way and joining their church.
shrug.gif


I answered their two questions...skipped around the trap and asked my own two bombshells. Quid pro quo, eh?

I HATE evangelism in any religion.

Commandment #11. Thou shalt not recruit through fear, perjury or ringing doorbells at 9am on Sunday mornings.
 

Gotholic

Well-Known Member
MrBishop said:
From: King James version Genesis 1:26

'26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.'

It is most likey referring to the Trinity. There is more then one person in the godhead: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are not three separate gods. Nor are they three beings. They are three distinct persons, yet, they are all the one God. For they are in perfect harmony.

Also...who did Cain and Seth marry?

Their sisters.

Some may argue that this couldn't of happened by appealing to the law that forbids brother-sister marriages. However, the law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18–20). It was necessary for brothers and sisters to marry because it was the only way for the human race to survive at that time. We are all of one blood.

But what about deformities? I will simply quote an explanation:

Today, brothers and sisters (and half-brothers and half-sisters, etc.) are not permitted by law to marry because their children have an unacceptably high risk of being deformed. The more closely the parents are related, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed.

There is a very sound genetic reason for such laws that is easy to understand. Every person has two sets of genes, there being some 130,000 pairs that specify how a person is put together and functions [Ed. note: This was an estimate from the number of different proteins. But after the Answers Book was published, the Human Genome Project discovered that there are only about 35,000 genes. This is an additional layer of complexity, since these genes must still somehow produce all the proteins. See Genome Mania—deciphering the human genome: what does it mean?] Each person inherits one gene of each pair from each parent. Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways. For instance, some people let their hair grow over their ears to hide the fact that one ear is lower than the other—or perhaps someone’s nose is not quite in the middle of his or her face, or someone’s jaw is a little out of shape—and so on. Let’s face it, the main reason we call each other normal is because of our common agreement to do so!

The more distantly related parents are, the more likely it is that they will have different mistakes in their genes. Children, inheriting one set of genes from each parent, are likely to end up with pairs of genes containing a maximum of one bad gene in each pair. The good gene tends to override the bad so that a deformity (a serious one, anyway) does not occur. Instead of having totally deformed ears, for instance, a person may only have crooked ones! (Overall, though, the human race is slowly degenerating as mistakes accumulate, generation after generation.)

However, the more closely related two people are, the more likely it is that they will have similar mistakes in their genes, since these have been inherited from the same parents. Therefore, a brother and a sister are more likely to have similar mistakes in their genes. A child of a union between such siblings could inherit the same bad gene on the same gene pair from both, resulting in two bad copies of the gene and serious defects.

However, Adam and Eve did not have accumulated genetic mistakes. When the first two people were created, they were physically perfect. Everything God made was ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31), so their genes were perfect—no mistakes! But, when sin entered the world (because of Adam—Genesis 3:6ff, Romans 5:12), God cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate, that is, suffer death and decay (Romans 8:22). Over thousands of years, this degeneration has produced all sorts of genetic mistakes in living things.

Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He (as well as his brothers and sisters) would have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam or Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with (it takes time for these copying errors to accumulate). In that situation, brother and sister could have married with God’s approval, without any potential to produce deformed offspring.

By the time of Moses (a few thousand years later), degenerative mistakes would have built up in the human race to such an extent that it was necessary for God to forbid brother-sister (and close relative) marriage (Leviticus 18–20).12 (Also, there were plenty of people on the Earth by now, and there was no reason for close relations to marry.)

I HATE evangelism in any religion.

Evangelism is not a bad thing. It is just some ways that people evangelize that are bad...
 

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
The trinity explanation, I can understand being used...unfortunatly, these people did not have this answer...just fishing for 'holes in my faith', ya know?

The sisters of Cain and Seth...that's my own question to guage how they feel about the open-garden idea...how close to the Bible=exact word of God and exact history of mankind...that even though no sisters are mentioned and in fact, no other people other than Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, and Seth are mentioned, that there had to have been others. Perhaps only Adam and Eve were in the garden...but others were created outside of the garden. :shrug:

It's more of a test of conviction, intelligence and faith than a history lesson.

As for evangelism... its an effort (hopefully well-meaning) to save me. The problem is that I have my own faith that I shall be saved...and with the number of different faiths and variations out there, should I choose to give up my faith to follow another whenever one comes up, I should be changing forever. I would also not be faithful to my faith.

Faith means believing in something without proof... if someone is trying to provide proof otherwise, they are trying to break my faith. Forgive me if I don't take kindly to that kind of attack.

Telling me that I have made the wrong choice in my faith is what evangelism is all about...its also what rubs me wrong. I'm not the only one here. What if a Muslim tried to convert you to Islam and told you that you were doomed to Hades if you did not? Would you give up your faith to become a Muslim because they had a convincing argument?
 

Leslie

Communistrator
Staff member
or it was freelovin like the seventies and they were borking Eve alongside Adam.

With a population of four I can't fathom that the concept of marriage had been defined at that point.
 

Gotholic

Well-Known Member
MrBishop said:
The sisters of Cain and Seth...that's my own question to guage how they feel about the open-garden idea...how close to the Bible=exact word of God and exact history of mankind...that even though no sisters are mentioned and in fact, no other people other than Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, and Seth are mentioned, that there had to have been others. Perhaps only Adam and Eve were in the garden...but others were created outside of the garden. :shrug:

They did have sisters. "After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters." [Genesis 5:4]

As for evangelism... its an effort (hopefully well-meaning) to save me. The problem is that I have my own faith that I shall be saved...and with the number of different faiths and variations out there, should I choose to give up my faith to follow another whenever one comes up, I should be changing forever. I would also not be faithful to my faith.

Indeed.

Faith means believing in something without proof... if someone is trying to provide proof otherwise, they are trying to break my faith. Forgive me if I don't take kindly to that kind of attack.

You can still have faith if you have proof. But people are more blessed if they believe without proof. Remember doubting Thomas? He did not believe that Christ rose from the dead until He stood before him with His wounds.

Telling me that I have made the wrong choice in my faith is what evangelism is all about...its also what rubs me wrong. I'm not the only one here. What if a Muslim tried to convert you to Islam and told you that you were doomed to Hades if you did not? Would you give up your faith to become a Muslim because they had a convincing argument?

Speaking for myself, there is not a thing in this world that can change my mind about my faith.


"preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction." [2 Timothy 4:2]

It is important to know why you believe in the things you believe. Many will debate with your faith and you must be able to defend it...
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
One reason Jesus spoke in parables. As he said (paraphasing...)
"It hard to express heavenly things in earthly terms"
Heaven isn't bound be the physics of this world, so many/all things are
possible, that may not make since to us mechanically.
 

chcr

Too cute for words
freako104 said:
it could be anything. I believe there was more than one God
That's actually implicit in the Hebrew bible but Yaweh is the "one true god" (the one that spoke to Abraham). A question though, freako. If there ever were more than one, by definition doesn't there still have to be?
 

freako104

Well-Known Member
Zeus might have but what about
Quetzcoatl
Zarathustara
Mars
Athena
Aris


and some of the others


Chic: they possibly could exsist. I personally believe in more than one deity. so I think they still do but that is me.
 

Lopan

New Member
Didn't realise Christians were such a bunch of incestuos mutants. I'm glad my ancestors climbed down from the trees and then evolved.

Whats the time frame, Adam and Eve to Jesus? I only ask because there was at least 1 billion + people on the planet by then. Also how did man manage to get to Australia or America, then populate, change colour and forget about christianity?
 

Inkara1

Well-Known Member
They wouldn't have "forgotten about" Christianity. The time frame between Adam and Eve was very long indeed. Jesus existed only a bit over 2,000 years ago. Judiasm is older than that. Since Christianity only is around 2,000 years old, no aboriginal population "forgot about" Christianity after having been exposed to it; they moved to Australia and the Americas long before the birth of Christ.
 

Lopan

New Member
I thought, by their reckoning that the earth was only 6000 years old? If Jesus was around feeding the 5000, 1970 years ago then that only leaves 4000 plus change years for the human population to spread all over the world and to get to the billion + figure. Is this possible when starting out with only 2 couples?

Also the mix of male and females born in the early stages would have to be 50 - 50, in fact it would have to be more females than males. The early mix showed 2-1 on the male side.

Nobody could have preamturely died or been infertile. They would also have to wait a minimum of 12 years for the girls to get to child bearing age. With only 1 child being born a year, it seems improbable to say the least.
 

freako104

Well-Known Member
Lopan said:
Didn't realise Christians were such a bunch of incestuos mutants. I'm glad my ancestors climbed down from the trees and then evolved.

Whats the time frame, Adam and Eve to Jesus? I only ask because there was at least 1 billion + people on the planet by then. Also how did man manage to get to Australia or America, then populate, change colour and forget about christianity?


The Bible is full of incest and intolerance in some areas.
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
If I can get a straight answer on who Adam & Eve's sons mated with, especially on how the mates came to be, when it was only 1 couple & two sons...then the rest of it might make sense.
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Lopan said:
I thought, by their reckoning that the earth was only 6000 years old? If Jesus was around feeding the 5000, 1970 years ago then that only leaves 4000 plus change years for the human population to spread all over the world and to get to the billion + figure. Is this possible when starting out with only 2 couples?

Also the mix of male and females born in the early stages would have to be 50 - 50, in fact it would have to be more females than males. The early mix showed 2-1 on the male side.

Nobody could have preamturely died or been infertile. They would also have to wait a minimum of 12 years for the girls to get to child bearing age. With only 1 child being born a year, it seems improbable to say the least.

Stop trying to apply science to religion. You'll just confuse the faithful. :lloyd:

Actually, it depends on whose math you believe. 6000 is more or less the lower limit for young earth creationists with 12-14,000 being the upper limit that I've read about. I usually use 10,000 as a nice round (and completely unsupportable) figure. The part I don't get, and maybe it's just me, is that if they are correct then god has deceived everyone else by putting all this scientific evidence around that the earth must be billions of years old. Even if I believed in god, I'd find it a little difficult to worship a such a liar. :shrug:
 
Top