Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why read the Bible literally: take two
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 306 (221154)
07-01-2005 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Faith
07-01-2005 12:04 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
When people live to be hundreds of years old and keep propagating there are a lot of strangers in the world very fast.
Let's say Adam and Eve had 20 kids, 10 daughters and 10 sons. That gives us 22 people. Let's say the 10 daughters marry the 10 sons, and each couple has 20 kids. That's 200. So we have a grand total of 222 people.
Not exactly a metropolis. I would think they would not have too hard of a time being acquainted with each other.
This message has been edited by robinrohan, 07-01-2005 11:31 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 12:04 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 12:40 PM robinrohan has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 62 of 306 (221156)
07-01-2005 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by robinrohan
07-01-2005 12:30 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
Let's say Adam and Eve had 20 kids, 10 daughters and 10 sons. That gives us 22 people. Let's say the 10 daughters marry the 10 sons, and each couple has 20 kids. That's 200. So we have a grand total of 222 people.
Not exactly a metropolis. I would think they would not have too hard of a time being acquainted with each other
With hundreds of years to go on having children I'm sure they had a lot more than 20. However, in the very next generation the 200 (divided by two to get couples = 100 couples) x 20 children each is 2000 already plus the parents, and their own oldest children would be having children when they themselves were still having children. And 20, again, is a very small number when you have hundreds of years of married life between people who were incredibly strong and healthy compared to us, and the rule to go forth and multiply.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by robinrohan, posted 07-01-2005 12:30 PM robinrohan has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Philip, posted 07-01-2005 1:19 PM Faith has replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 306 (221163)
07-01-2005 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by robinrohan
07-01-2005 9:50 AM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
quote:
"And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him."
What is the necessity of this mark? It's not like there are a lot of strangers out there.
Actually, the mark was not intended to make Cain recognizable. If people didn't recognize who Cain was, then they wouldn't have a motive it kill him, right? The mark was to protect Cain from the people who would recognize him as the murderer of Abel.
The mark was intended to be a sign from God that Cain was under his protection.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by robinrohan, posted 07-01-2005 9:50 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by robinrohan, posted 07-01-2005 1:30 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Philip
Member (Idle past 4722 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 64 of 306 (221164)
07-01-2005 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Faith
07-01-2005 12:40 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
Looking at your subtitle.
It seems perhaps an honest Evo would no longer beg the question "Who did Cain marry?" as it strongly supports YEC contra-theories that a perfect gene-pool was once pre-built into Adam whose ‘rib’ became dissected out and cloned into Eve, even: Namely, Adam’s WIFE.
While suggesting that YECism is true, I’d expect that Cain, Seth and generations of their descendents routinely married their sisters (like Abraham, as you cited), at least until the human gene-pool severely devolved and shortened man’s days.
Even in David’s day, it appears Absalom slew his own incestuous step-brother. (2Sa 13:1 And it came to pass after this, that Absalom the son of David had a fair sister, whose name was Tamar; and Amnon the son of David loved her (etc.)
Presently, it appears to me that many mammalian males do regularly marry their sisters (dogs and cats come to mind).
Also, I’d personally increase offspring to a conservative 10-50 children per family by Enoch’s day (the 7th generation from Adam). (The mother of my flesh had 12 children and 2 miscarriages)
I may be wrong,

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 12:40 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 1:25 PM Philip has replied
 Message 67 by robinrohan, posted 07-01-2005 2:05 PM Philip has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 65 of 306 (221165)
07-01-2005 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Philip
07-01-2005 1:19 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
You seem to be saying pretty much what I'm saying. Except I'd say 10-50 is VERY VERY conservative for the age in which people were living hundreds of years with a lot more vigor than later generations had. To my mind Adam and Eve alone could have had 200-300 children or even more, and also their own offspring, gradually diminishing as the life span diminished.
Cats and dogs do mate with siblings but it's not good for them either any more, as the whole creation has been gradually deteriorating over time. I know a little cat with an extra tiny little paw on each foot, probably the offspring of siblings.
My grandparents had thirteen on one side, two dying in infancy, and ten on the other, also losing two, one in infancy, one in childhood. Adam and Eve and their descendants for the first few generations must have been able to multiply such numbers enormously.
Already in my own family my grandchildren do not know their third and fourth cousins, and could conceivably meet and marry among them.
{Edit: The point being it only takes a few generations to get "strangers" from two people even now, if they spread out geographically certainly, so how much more so back in Cain's day.
This message has been edited by Faith, 07-01-2005 01:43 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Philip, posted 07-01-2005 1:19 PM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Philip, posted 07-01-2005 5:00 PM Faith has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 66 of 306 (221166)
07-01-2005 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Chiroptera
07-01-2005 1:02 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
The mark was intended to be a sign from God that Cain was under his protection.
Thanks, that makes sense. It's rather odd, but apparently Cain had no children at this time. He must have been about a 100 years old. It was only after he went to Nod that he knew his wife--perhaps a first cousin.
Seth was a replacement for Abel, and you get the impression that this was Eve's third child. But obviously that cannot be. None of Eve's other children are mentioned. From Chapter 5, one gets the impression that Adam really didn't get going with having children until after he begot Seth, at the age of 130.
As a matter of fact, Genesis seems to suggest that people didn't have children until they were about 100. There's Cain, and there's also Seth. "And Seth lived a hundred and five years, and begat Enos."
But maybe that could be explained by the idea that all along they were having all these other kids. They just weren't mentioned, for some reason.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Chiroptera, posted 07-01-2005 1:02 PM Chiroptera has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 67 of 306 (221167)
07-01-2005 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Philip
07-01-2005 1:19 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
It seems perhaps an honest Evo would no longer beg the question "Who did Cain marry?"
What has "honesty" got to do with it? One is not "honest" if one asks that question? I wasn't familiar with that pure-blood theory.
What I find strange is that this incredible story about people living 900 years and mating with their brothers and sisters because they had pure blood or something would be more believable to anyone than the scientific account.
It amazes me.
This message has been edited by robinrohan, 07-01-2005 01:06 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Philip, posted 07-01-2005 1:19 PM Philip has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 2:12 PM robinrohan has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 68 of 306 (221168)
07-01-2005 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by robinrohan
07-01-2005 2:05 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
What I find strange is that this incredible story about people lving 900 years and mating with their brothers and sisters becuase they had pure blood or something would be more believable to anyone than the scientific account.
It's only believable to those who have learned who God is and what it all means and why it happened that way etc. The scientific account simply extrapolates back from what is observed to be the normal situation now, and makes the unsupportable assumption that things were always the same. The Bible gives a different view, claiming to be a record in fact, and if you understand that view it makes sense. If science doesn't recognize it, eventually science will run into more and more inexplicables, particularly as they trace back genomes, as the facts just are not going to fit their evolutionist presuppositions. They don't fit now as it is, but since it's all a matter of interpretation and not testable, falsifiable etc., they can go for quite some time before the inexplicables force recognition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by robinrohan, posted 07-01-2005 2:05 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by CK, posted 07-01-2005 3:05 PM Faith has replied
 Message 73 by robinrohan, posted 07-01-2005 3:32 PM Faith has replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 69 of 306 (221172)
07-01-2005 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Faith
07-01-2005 2:12 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
So what you are saying is if we were "perfect" - we could have sex with our parents and children?
Hum.....
Oh and can I borrow your time machine...
quote:
if science doesn't recognize it, eventually science will run into more and more inexplicables
Argument to the Future: You commit this fallacy if you claim that your worldview will soon prevail because the evidence is in the making - your victory is just round the corner. Pseudosciences do this all the time.
SLOT88 Situs Judi Slot Online Terpercaya No 1 di Indonesia

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 2:12 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 3:12 PM CK has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 70 of 306 (221174)
07-01-2005 3:12 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by CK
07-01-2005 3:05 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
I don't claim the evidence is "in the making" I claim it's already there to be recognized only a strong delusional preconception prevents its recognition. This is because evolution is an interpretation about past events and is therefore unfalsifiable. It's quite possible that the delusion will persist for quite a long time however.
No you couldn't "have sex with" parents and children, that NEVER happened, but you could MARRY a sister, not "have sex with" -- that's never been permitted, and where fornication prevails sin increases and the life span decreases so not a good idea for the health of the genome. If you went back there in a time machine, the way you talk the race would deteriorate pretty fast with your attitudes.
This message has been edited by Faith, 07-01-2005 03:14 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by CK, posted 07-01-2005 3:05 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by CK, posted 07-01-2005 3:24 PM Faith has replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 71 of 306 (221176)
07-01-2005 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Faith
07-01-2005 3:12 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
Plenty of double-speak in there:
quote:
No you couldn't "have sex with" parents and children, that NEVER happened, but you could MARRY a sister, not "have sex with" -
Right so if I'm perfect I can marry my sister and have sex with her?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 3:12 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 3:29 PM CK has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 72 of 306 (221178)
07-01-2005 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by CK
07-01-2005 3:24 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
No doublespeak at all, just a problem sorting out sin from the permissible.
Right so if I'm perfect I can marry my sister and have sex with her?
Yes, but you ain't anywhere near perfect so forget it. If you have living great great greats who live 900 or so years and the longevity is persisting in the family, then we can talk perfect.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by CK, posted 07-01-2005 3:24 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by CK, posted 07-01-2005 3:36 PM Faith has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 306 (221179)
07-01-2005 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Faith
07-01-2005 2:12 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
The scientific account simply extrapolates back from what is observed to be the normal situation now, and makes the unsupportable assumption that things were always the same
Whereas those in the know have all this evidence that people way back in the day used to live 900 years.
If science doesn't recognize it, eventually science will run into more and more inexplicables, particularly as they trace back genomes, as the facts just are not going to fit their evolutionist presuppositions. They don't fit now as it is, but since it's all a matter of interpretation and not testable, falsifiable etc., they can go for quite some time before the inexplicables force recognition.
In other words, all the scientists down through the years who have done research in this field don't know what they are talking about. They are clowns who don't even know the basics of their own field and haven't known it for many years. Biologists can correct me if I am wrong, but I am under the impression that TOE is a fundamental concept in the entire field of biological study. It's not something extraneous that we could very well do without.
Anyway, these clowns have for more than a century been building up more and more empirical evidence, starting with the fossil record and development of dating technqiues, and then getting a big confirming boost from DNA analysis (relatively recent)--all this being done in a state of sheer delusion. Because from the point of view of Genesis, that's what it amounts to.
If they insist on researching the physical past, they ought to be out searching for Eden and trying to find the fossils of people who lived for 900 years. That might be worthwhile. Instead they are doing all this research and wasting our tax dollars on an ignorant theory. Any results from any study based on TOE is a total waste of time, of no more use than trying to figure out the movements of the planets before it was discovered that the Earth revolved around the sun. TOE is really on the same level as Ptolemaic astronomy.
That appears to be the conclusion of creationists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 2:12 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 3:36 PM robinrohan has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 74 of 306 (221180)
07-01-2005 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by robinrohan
07-01-2005 3:32 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
Whereas those in the know have all this evidence that people way back in the day used to live 900 years.
Yes, the best possible evidence. And yes yes yes yes yes and yup yup yup to most of the rest too, although looking for the 900 year old fossils doesn't make much sense as most of those were long gone even before the Flood. How would a fossil of a 900-year-old appear different from say an 80-year-old one by today's standards anyway?
This message has been edited by Faith, 07-01-2005 03:36 PM
This message has been edited by Faith, 07-01-2005 03:44 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by robinrohan, posted 07-01-2005 3:32 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by robinrohan, posted 07-01-2005 3:53 PM Faith has replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 75 of 306 (221181)
07-01-2005 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Faith
07-01-2005 3:29 PM


Re: Who did Cain marry?
People are perfect in heaven - so jesus is getting a little booty right?
(unless he's God and all that...)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 3:29 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Faith, posted 07-01-2005 3:37 PM CK has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024