An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 17 Votes - 3.88 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-12-2013, 12:37 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 12:00 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  With whom did Cain mate? When he killed his brother, there were only three people on the planet.
in the beginning of page 41 I have an answer to your question.
But I can repeat. Author of Genesis never said that Cain and Abel were first children of Adam and Eve.
The only reason why names of Cain and Abel were mentioned first is because Cain became first cold blooded murderer and Abel became first innocent victim if cold blooded murder.
Author of Genesis never said that Cain was FIRSTBORN.

(16-12-2013 12:00 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Regardless of the above answer, the entire species had a pretty big bottle neck with Noah and his three sons. Were any of his sons not his son, or something?
According to author of Genesis Noah had three sons but Noah could have more children at that time. We only know that those three sons with their wives were saved during the flood.
Did I answer your question? I am not sure I understood what you were asking.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2013, 01:36 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 12:37 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 12:00 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  With whom did Cain mate? When he killed his brother, there were only three people on the planet.
in the beginning of page 41 I have an answer to your question.
But I can repeat. Author of Genesis never said that Cain and Abel were first children of Adam and Eve.
The only reason why names of Cain and Abel were mentioned first is because Cain became first cold blooded murderer and Abel became first innocent victim if cold blooded murder.
Author of Genesis never said that Cain was FIRSTBORN.

This is true. If you trace the lineage(s) given in the New Testament, the son immediately after Adam is Seth.

So, I'm assuming Cain mated with his sister. Or mother. Or did God make other people after the fact out of nothing clay/ribs?


(16-12-2013 12:37 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 12:00 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Regardless of the above answer, the entire species had a pretty big bottle neck with Noah and his three sons. Were any of his sons not his son, or something?
According to author of Genesis Noah had three sons but Noah could have more children at that time. We only know that those three sons with their wives were saved during the flood.
Did I answer your question? I am not sure I understood what you were asking.

Are you saying that Genesis lists three children (and their wives) that are saved, but doesn't explicitly say that those three sons were the only sons saved? The idea is that the Bible didn't explicitly say that there was no one else, so there might have been other people?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2013, 01:55 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 01:36 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  So, I'm assuming Cain mated with his sister. Or mother.
with his sister and not with his mother.
(16-12-2013 01:36 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Or did God make other people after the fact out of nothing clay/ribs?
God didn't make Adam directly out of claim. At least author of genesis doesn't claim this.
Clay is made/organized from elements. Adam was created/organized from elements. Main point of the author of Genesis is who caused man Adam to be. But what his body is organized from is something that humans have ability to figure out on their own. And we are doing good job. An opportunity to learn about our bodies on our own gives us an opportunity to PROGRESS.
"clay" is the fastest way to tell people that God creates something out of something and not out of nothing. But as I said before this is not main point from what men are organized.

(16-12-2013 01:36 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Are you saying that Genesis lists three children (and their wives) that are saved, but doesn't explicitly say that those three sons were the only sons saved? The idea is that the Bible didn't explicitly say that there was no one else, so there might have been other people?
Sorry for not understanding you.
From Genesis we learn that there were only 8 people that were saved during flood: Noah and his wife, Noah's 3 sons and their wives. All other people died.
If Noah had other children beside those 3 sons they died.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2013, 02:04 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 01:55 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 01:36 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  So, I'm assuming Cain mated with his sister. Or mother.
with his sister and not with his mother.
(16-12-2013 01:36 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Or did God make other people after the fact out of nothing clay/ribs?
God didn't make Adam directly out of claim. At least author of genesis doesn't claim this.
Clay is made/organized from elements. Adam was created/organized from elements. Main point of the author of Genesis is who caused man Adam to be. But what his body is organized from is something that humans have ability to figure out on their own. And we are doing good job. An opportunity to learn about our bodies on our own gives us an opportunity to PROGRESS.
"clay" is the fastest way to tell people that God creates something out of something and not out of nothing. But as I said before this is not main point from what men are organized.

(16-12-2013 01:36 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Are you saying that Genesis lists three children (and their wives) that are saved, but doesn't explicitly say that those three sons were the only sons saved? The idea is that the Bible didn't explicitly say that there was no one else, so there might have been other people?
Sorry for not understanding you.
From Genesis we learn that there were only 8 people that were saved during flood: Noah and his wife, Noah's 3 sons and their wives. All other people died.
If Noah had other children beside those 3 sons they died.

And yet we see the existing human genetic diversity that couldn't possibly come from that small a population in that short a time since the alleged flood.

And a distribution of genes in different populations that could not have come about in that short a time since the alleged flood.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
16-12-2013, 02:11 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 02:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 01:55 PM)Alla Wrote:  with his sister and not with his mother.
God didn't make Adam directly out of claim. At least author of genesis doesn't claim this.
Clay is made/organized from elements. Adam was created/organized from elements. Main point of the author of Genesis is who caused man Adam to be. But what his body is organized from is something that humans have ability to figure out on their own. And we are doing good job. An opportunity to learn about our bodies on our own gives us an opportunity to PROGRESS.
"clay" is the fastest way to tell people that God creates something out of something and not out of nothing. But as I said before this is not main point from what men are organized.

Sorry for not understanding you.
From Genesis we learn that there were only 8 people that were saved during flood: Noah and his wife, Noah's 3 sons and their wives. All other people died.
If Noah had other children beside those 3 sons they died.

And yet we see the existing human genetic diversity that couldn't possibly come from that small a population in that short a time since the alleged flood.
OK. how do we know that it is not possible?

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2013, 03:07 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 01:55 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 01:36 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  So, I'm assuming Cain mated with his sister. Or mother.
with his sister and not with his mother.


How do you know this? The Bible doesn't say so, does it?


(16-12-2013 01:55 PM)Alla Wrote:  God didn't make Adam directly out of claim. At least author of genesis doesn't claim this.
Clay is made/organized from elements. Adam was created/organized from elements. Main point of the author of Genesis is who caused man Adam to be. But what his body is organized from is something that humans have ability to figure out on their own. And we are doing good job. An opportunity to learn about our bodies on our own gives us an opportunity to PROGRESS.
"clay" is the fastest way to tell people that God creates something out of something and not out of nothing. But as I said before this is not main point from what men are organized.

So, "clay" doesn't mean "clay", but rather it's an approximation for people who wouldn't understand otherwise?

What of the rest of the creation story? Could it not just be an approximation to explain stuff to uneducated people? What about the flood? Could it be a scare story to make people behave, yet never happened? What about Jesus? Could that just be a happy salvation story to make people feel better about their lot in life?


(16-12-2013 01:55 PM)Alla Wrote:  Sorry for not understanding you.
From Genesis we learn that there were only 8 people that were saved during flood: Noah and his wife, Noah's 3 sons and their wives. All other people died.
If Noah had other children beside those 3 sons they died.

Okay, so if they all died, then either Cain's seed passed through with the survivors, or it didn't, and Cain's seed no longer exists.

You could argue that it was one of the son's wives that bore Cain's seed, but they typically tracked genealogy through fathers back then because of lol patriarchy. Note how they trace the genealogy of Jesus (twice, and different each time!), going up through Joseph, who's not even his father! They didn't even trace it through Mary.

According to Genesis and the misogynistic Hebrew culture, the line of Cain would have ended a few chapters into Genesis.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2013, 03:14 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 02:11 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 02:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  And yet we see the existing human genetic diversity that couldn't possibly come from that small a population in that short a time since the alleged flood.
OK. how do we know that it is not possible?

Start here:
Population genetics.

and here:
Mutation rate in humans.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
16-12-2013, 04:44 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 03:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 02:11 PM)Alla Wrote:  OK. how do we know that it is not possible?

Start here:
Population genetics.

and here:
Mutation rate in humans.
thank you!! I will read and I will respond.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2013, 05:21 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 01:55 PM)Alla Wrote:  with his sister and not with his mother.

How do you know this? The Bible doesn't say so, does it?
According to the Bible marriage is one Adam(man) and one Eve(woman). Sometimes we see that marriage is one Adam(man) and more than one Eve(woman) - polygamy.
But marriage is never one Eve and more than one Adam.
Eve could have only one sexual partner - her husband.
Adam could have more than one wife.

(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  So, "clay" doesn't mean "clay", but rather it's an approximation for people who wouldn't understand otherwise?
"Clay" also can be wrong translation. But God tries to explain us things the way that we can understand. In times of author of Genesis "clay" could be the best way to describe the truth. God uses material to create/organize something. This is the point.

(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  What of the rest of the creation story? Could it not just be an approximation to explain stuff to uneducated people?
Yes. People in those times had to understand what God was telling them.
And the story of creation is given only for one purpose:
we have to know who organized this world. And few details were given. Just to have an idea.
And what author of Genesis said do not contradict modern science.

(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  What about the flood? Could it be a scare story to make people behave, yet never happened?
No. Those people knew about true God and broke their covenants and they did horrible evil like molested their children and killed them. Those who broke covenant were warned about what will happen to them if they don't repent.
But it will never happen again. There are so many people who never broke covenants because they never made them. God doesn't punish innocent people(who do not know about Him) by sending natural disasters.
But some Christians want us to believe this.

(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  What about Jesus? Could that just be a happy salvation story to make people feel better about their lot in life?
If it is just a story then we are all doomed.
If Jesus didn't resurrect nobody will.
But Holy Ghost testifies to me that plan of salvation is true.


(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Okay, so if they all died, then either Cain's seed passed through with the survivors, or it didn't, and Cain's seed no longer exists.
RobbyPants you are so good. You are the best THINKING atheist I have ever talked to.
I have answer to your question but because it is not in the Bible I will not give it to you. But I will give you another answer.
Ham could be married to one of Cain's daughters.
God doesn't allow marriage with the seed that is cursed. But we know that when somebody from the cursed seed makes covenant with true God curse is not on them anymore.

(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  You could argue that it was one of the son's wives that bore Cain's seed, but they typically tracked genealogy through fathers back then because of lol patriarchy.

Yes, but Ham's children there was his wife's/Cains blood.
Later Ham's seed was cursed. May be Ham's wife turned back to her religion and taught her children wrong things. Things that she saw her father/Cain did.

(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Note how they trace the genealogy of Jesus (twice, and different each time!), going up through Joseph, who's not even his father! They didn't even trace it through Mary.
Mary was descendent of David. His moral mother's blood was in Jesus.

(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  According to Genesis and the misogynistic Hebrew culture, the line of Cain would have ended a few chapters into Genesis.
Unless as you said yourself Ham married Egyptus(one of Cain's daughters)
But don't ask me about Egyptus. You will not find about her in the Bible.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2013, 07:54 PM
RE: An atheist's critique of the Bible (Book and eBook now available)
(16-12-2013 05:21 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  How do you know this? The Bible doesn't say so, does it?
According to the Bible marriage is one Adam(man) and one Eve(woman). Sometimes we see that marriage is one Adam(man) and more than one Eve(woman) - polygamy.
But marriage is never one Eve and more than one Adam.
Eve could have only one sexual partner - her husband.
Adam could have more than one wife.

Actually, I just read Genesis 4, and he went to a new land (Nod), and named the city he built after his son that he had with his wife. But, was that his sister that he took with him, then? He made reference to anyone he ran into would kill him. He said this after being driven out of the land away from God. So, were there already other people living away from God?


(16-12-2013 05:21 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  What about the flood? Could it be a scare story to make people behave, yet never happened?
No. Those people knew about true God and broke their covenants and they did horrible evil like molested their children and killed them. Those who broke covenant were warned about what will happen to them if they don't repent.
But it will never happen again. There are so many people who never broke covenants because they never made them. God doesn't punish innocent people(who do not know about Him) by sending natural disasters.
But some Christians want us to believe this.

Yeah, but how do you know? If the creation story can be an approximation to get simple people thinking about complex things, why can't the flood story be an approximation to scare them into obedience. I mean, we know that it didn't actually happen. There's no evidence of a flood of that magnitude, and it's not like epic flood stories are unique to Judaism, or anything.


(16-12-2013 05:21 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  What about Jesus? Could that just be a happy salvation story to make people feel better about their lot in life?
If it is just a story then we are all doomed.
If Jesus didn't resurrect nobody will.
But Holy Ghost testifies to me that plan of salvation is true.

Again, how do you know? What if the whole idea of salvation and damnation are just approximations to incentivize a certain behavior? You have to realize that until Christianity, Judaism didn't have a belief in a distinct heaven and hell. They believed all people went to the same place when they died (Sheol, which means "grave"). Any time you see the word "Hell" used in the Old Testament, it's a translation of either "Sheol" or "Gehenna". Christianity took the whole heaven/hell-salvation/damnation motif from Zoroastrianism.

So, if "made from clay" can mean "made from complex science!" and "day" can mean "any random length of time" and "God said 'Let there be light' and there was light" could mean "there was already light and God made more of it", how do you know that any of the Bible means what it says it means?

Why do you get to determine what is literal and what is metaphorical? How do you decide what really happened and what is a parable?

I'm not saying you're wrong, per se, but I don't know how you can make the claims that you do.


(16-12-2013 05:21 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(16-12-2013 03:07 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Okay, so if they all died, then either Cain's seed passed through with the survivors, or it didn't, and Cain's seed no longer exists.
RobbyPants you are so good. You are the best THINKING atheist I have ever talked to.
I have answer to your question but because it is not in the Bible I will not give it to you. But I will give you another answer.
Ham could be married to one of Cain's daughters.
God doesn't allow marriage with the seed that is cursed. But we know that when somebody from the cursed seed makes covenant with true God curse is not on them anymore.

Okay, there is the possibility of it traveling down the lines of the women, although it seems unlikely, since they just didn't seem concerned about female lineage back than.

That being said, I read Genesis 4 and see nowhere in it that Cain was cursed beyond himself. I see no reference to a curse that passes down through his children. Is this given elsewhere, or just an extrapolation that someone made up?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: