Bible Question

[Angry Dragon]

It is written in the Bible that a god created Adam and Eve
They had two sons at the beginning
Cain killed Able
God sent Cain away and he went to live in the land of Nod with other people

Where the heck did these other people come from??

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. incest.

Eating the fruit wasn't the only thing those crazy ancestors got up to.

[Angry Dragon]

3. incest with whom??

[trotsky]

2. And in that same exact vein...

how could Voldemort not have known or at least figured out that Harry himself was a horcrux? He knew how many he had intentionally made, he clearly had the experience to know what happens when one is made. So how the heck did he not know that?

[JoePhilly]

4. Blasphemer!!!!

[Angry Dragon]

5. I can not find any reference to those things you mention in the Bibles I have

[TlalocW]

6. Maybe he did

And Harry had to be an acceptable loss otherwise the prophecy of ending Voldemort would come true.

TlalocW

[Goblinmonger]

9. oh, oh, oh, plus, Voldemort is a pretty smart guy

so how would he not have figured out that Harry was the chosen one just because Voldemort made him that. Neville could have been the one, too, but it was Harry just because Voldemort tried to kill him.

Harry Potter is a lot more fun to talk about and has FAR fewer plot holes than the bible.

[rug]

7. .

[Angry Dragon]

8. thanks for the clip

care to answer the posed question??

[rug]

11. The literalist answer is that Eve bore unnamed "other sons and daughters” (Gen 5:4).

Not being a literalist, I read it as a metaphor for the moral development of humanity (which does not contradict evolution).

Let me spare you the next obvious question for a literalist. The prohibition against incest was not announced until generations later (Lev 18-20).

That's all I have for you. I find both literalist critiques and literalist readings of the Bible as stultifying as the witness in the clip.

[Angry Dragon]

16. ...........

[Major Nikon]

28. How do you tell which parts of the bible are to be taken literally and which are not?

[goldent]

29. That is a complex question and one that theologians

spend a lot of time on. As you might imagine, there are all kinds of methodologies, and lots of debate.

[Major Nikon]

30. Which essentially means the bible says whatever you want it to say

...and the only ones who are the most consistent are the literalists.

[goldent]

31. It is a complex book and there are no rules as to how you interpret it.

You are free to do what you want.

Like many ancient (and not-so-ancient) texts, there are scholars who study it in detail to try to understand the parts of it that are history and the parts that are allegory. Give it a try!

Regarding consistency, you have no doubt heard this quote by Emerson:

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — 'Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.' — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.

[Major Nikon]

32. I was referring to consistency among groups, not consistency within individuals

The Emerson quote was one of my father's favorites who like Emerson, was a Unitarian minister. My father used it in at least one sermon where he taught that religion should always be independently validated by each individual and we should never take for granted what someone else tells us to believe, or not believe. When asked what to believe he would always say it's up to you to figure that one out. I'm not sure if many religionists who are not Unitarians or subscribe to certain far eastern theologies would care for that philosophy much, though.

As far as all those people you mentioned, with the exception of one we have independent verification the writings(or at least the vast majority of writings) attributed to them are genuine. So it makes it a much simpler matter to derive understandings of their works. In the case of Jesus, some of the biggest debates among theologians concern whether biblical passages can actually be attributed to him, and biblical historians often debate whether any of it can be.

Anyone can be misunderstood, so I don't really attribute that quality to greatness. YMMV.

[cleanhippie]

18. He doesn't do that. Answering questions would expose the hypocrisy.

Now, cue his lame retort in 3...2...

[Angry Dragon]

19. he gave me a nice answer ........ see above

[cleanhippie]

20. Well damn. Maybe hell has frozen over or something.

Or it could be because he got a hide today.

[rug]

21. Or maybe you have perception problems.

Rolling around on the floor frequently tends to skew what you see.

[Warpy]

10. Adam & Eve were nothing but lab rats, an experiment

to see how people with free will born into a perfect world would behave. The serpent told them the truth about the fruit they weren't supposed to eat, god lied about it.

The rest of us were already here to welcome them when they escaped the cage.

[Hayduke Bomgarte]

12. I was too young to remember it, but

My older brother was asked to not return to Confirmation classes, as a kid, for asking that very question.

That story has been recounted many times through the years at family gatherings. As far as I am aware, he still has never gotten any intelligible answer.

[mr blur]

13. Well either they had sex with their mother, or. . . actually, that's it.

But do consult an apologist, they'll probably explain how incest was OK in those days because Gawd hadn't decided it was wrong yet. Plenty of apologists around - oh, look, there's one up there

[rug]

14. Pesky time stamps. Your attempt at snark results in simple plagiarism.

Work on your wit. You're halfway there.

[LostOne4Ever]

15. The answer to that question:

[Angry Dragon]

17. I have heard that before

[Act_of_Reparation]

22. Simple answer

Genesis isn't the work of a single author, but a compilation of works created by multiple authors over a long period of time.

Also, it's fiction.

[Fumesucker]

23. So the Bible is kind of like bronze age fanfic?

[Act_of_Reparation]

24. More of like a bronze age fanfic compendium.

The best work of the biggest fans of the Enuma Elis.

[Fumesucker]

25. Pedant....

[SheilaT]

27. Bronze age fanfic compendium.

OMG! I am going to have to remember that.

I was raised Catholic, so of course I was discouraged from ever reading the Bible, and did so out of curiosity when in my twenties. Never quite got around to reading it all, but I must say that Genesis reads like pure science fiction.

[Warpy]

26. Adam & Eve were his lab rats

The rest of us were already here.