Wow you guys are quick on the keyboard.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by IcePlatinumSky</i>
I will take this one monkey boy!!!! Yes in verses 4:14-17 in Genesis Cain was worried about being killed by others, and married a wife.. The answer to your question was that in 1:28 they Adam and Eve had been told to fill the earth, and they had numerous children. Cains wife could have been one of his sisters or a nice. The human race was Genetically pure then so there was no fear of side effects from marrying relatives.
Hey monkey boy what church do you go to?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
(Upon later reading, I saw Pen covered this one too)
Excellent, that is exactly what I was thinking. Let's not forget that the Bible doesn't say how long Adam and Eve lived either... or at what age or how many individual children they had. If they lived anywhere near the age of Enoch (900 years) then they could have had hundreds of children, not to mention the children having children of their own at the young age of 16 or whatever... generations begeting generations while the previous generations are still begetting!
Right now I attend Bethany Bible Church.
Rick also mentioned Ken Ham. Ken Ham is an excellent historical theologist! I suggest that if you have any doubts about the beginnings of man or natural history you get a tape of his seminars. I went to one in Jr. high school and I was blown away, that guy knows his stuff.
Someone also mentioned homosexuallity being justified by the Bible. Harley had it right when he said that it is one of those weird interpretations of the Biblical text, but clearly it cannot be an accurate interpretation if it conflicts with other parts of the Bible.
You see now why all other parts of the Bible are important?
If there was not that clear section where we could see that "man shall not lay down with man" we might be obliged to accept the incorrect doctrine proposed by these churches.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Iriginally posted by leakingpen</i>
the trinity is NOT a "christian" belief. it is a CATHOLIC belief that is prevelent in many of the splinter groups. ditto the virgin birth.
if you dont buy the whole, the son of god is also god, except for the part of him, the holy spirit, that he left on earth, but its still part of him, and also part of god....
yeesh.
and im sorry, but i cant except the bible as the literal history of the world. genesis makes a great story, but its just that. you cant use adam and , not adam and steve, as an arguement. sorry.
and pleasure is felt in all mammals, all avians, and most reptiles and amphibians. it is in fact the driving reason for procreation in most mammals and avians. (little known fact. every known bird species, both males and females, masturbate. you thought that was crap on your car?)
as for the wrongness of homosexuality and just plain sexual largess, well, the early christians, shortly after christs death, were party animals. the disciples (with a couple obvious exceptions) got it on constantly. the catholic church performed same sex marriages up until about 1500 ad.
as for hell.
show me a single verse of the bible where christ is quoted as saying there is a hell and unbelievers will go there. difficulty = quoted, therefore the revelations of st john the divinely stoned are a no go.
and i said no harm, physically or mentally. not to a morality. if your morality is such that you go nutballs over what i do, your causing mental anguish to yourself, im not doing it to you.
and i fail to see how the new and old testament must be taken together...
especially with the changes that have been shown to take place, mostly due to translation and retranslation errors (most famously, though shalt not suffer a witch to live. what a great piece of politics that was.)
and christian, ill answer that one. according to teh bible, people lived a long time back then. nod was actually empty (except for lilith, if you read the apocropha) and eventually (read, a few hundred years) cain made his way to the city of the sons of seth, who was adams son with one of his and eves daughters. dont forget, noah lived to be 800 and something. long life apparently was longer back then.
as for the inspired word of god, how do we know EVERY book is the inspired word of god? there ARE multiple authors. the old testament was written over a few thousand years, the new over several hundred.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
If I recall correctly, this idea of the trinity is where we left off last time in one of our philosophical debates pen. You have to understand that technically, today's conservative Christianity is a reformed version of Catholicism (via the Protestants), and that Catholicism is actually a version of the original Christianity that holds incorrect doctrine... such as praying to other deities, making and worshiping graven images, and now they say homosexuallity is OK.
As I said before, there were two debates sanctioned by Constantine (the Roman ruler) that pretty much ended up saying that Jesus was God and God has multiple parts. The Councils of Nicea and Chalcedon were the ones to put forth those ideas.
The nature of God is eternal (infinite). Just because Constantine (who really began the Catholic Church) was the first one declare these ideas to a nation does not mean that they were untrue before he declared them.
I thought I heard that only more advanced primates and dolphins experience pleasure from sex. Whatever the case... plant life, bacteria, fish, insects and all the like most definitely perpetuate themselves without pleasure.
If you want a verse about hell, here are a FEW, and I mean a few of the many, many, many there are:
Matt. 5:29
If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
Rev. 20:14-15
Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.
Luke 12:5
But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him.
Hell is real. Hell is a bad place to be.
Pen... your idea of a non-interacting morality can not be correct. Even the idea of your morality existing conflicts with mine. Pen's morality physically conflicts with mine because it denies the written word of God (the Bible). It mentally conflicts and harms my morality because it exists contrary to my own.
You are trying to separate the idea of "interacting" from its critical use in the idea of "conflict". To have conflict, there must be at least two interacting forces.
The thing about the Old Testament is that, well... it's old. I'm not saying, forget about the Ten Commandments in the OT, I'm just saying that when Jesus came along, he changed the way we do things. Like when he kept a crowd from stoning a woman who had just committed adultery. It doesn't mean that it was not a sin, it just means that she was forgiven of her sin.
Pen asked how we know what is God inspired. Pen there are many arguments for determining what is correct and "God-breathed". There was a council in the early days of the Church to decide what was and wasn't God-breathed, the name escapes, but there was a council that used some of the following arguments:
1. Does it sound right? Do the words in this book conflict with what we know to be true and pure (eg. basic stuff like, the idea of God or the ten commandments).
2. Do the words of the book conflict with other books? (This question is why Christians don't use the Apocryphal books or some of the books that Eastern Orthadox Christians use). This one is the biggie becasue they already had the Hebrew Septuagint to go on, and if something conflicted with the Septuagint it was thrown out.
3. Does the book conflict with any of the physical evidence or personal accounts.
So to answer your question. We don't know 100% that we have all of the Bible, but we know that what we do have is right on, and the stuff we threw out, we did for a reason.
