God the Father

vic you do have a point there

There's been conversation that I thought would go off track.

And the ones that got way off base and even out of line.

I just wanted to this before the hand basket arrived.

Wrong cat.

good thinking vic

So, after God created Adam and Eve, and Eve gave birth to children, the rest of mankind came about through incest? This doesn't sound like something Jesus would approve.

Jimi, why would you think he was against incest, where is incest first mentioned in the bible anyway ?

Hi Vic,

Everything was going fine, until you wrote:

God the Father and his male son Jesus.  Mary, the female mother of Jesus.  Then the Holy Spirit, which the Hloy Spirit delivers the miracle in which the Word was made Flesh, that would be Jesus. The Holy Family unit.

Keep in mind that the Godhead is called the TRINITY -- not the QUADGOD.   And, the Trinity is Father, Son, Holy Spirit.  There is no Mary in there at all. 

Yes, God did use Mary as the human womb through which Jesus Christ would be born into His human nature.  And, like all good human parents, she and Joseph raised Him through His formative years.  But, that is the extent of their involvement.  Mary is NOT the mother of God and Joseph is NOT the father of God.   God is preexisting, eternal, i.e., He was not born, He was not created -- HE ALWAYS WAS, IS, AND ALWAYS WILL BE -- eternally God.  He has no father, no mother.

Jiimi, you asked about incest.  Yes, in our world today, that would appear to be incest.  However, incest did not exist until God gave the Ten Commandments and the Law to Moses.  After the Creation, and after Adam and Eve were evicted from the Garden of Eden -- they began to have children.  Those siblings did indeed marry; then cousins began to marry.  At that time, that was not a problem because the gene pool was so pure then.

Later, because the gene pool had begun to be corrupted -- and because the world population allowed -- God put a stop to interfamily marriages.  And, that is where we are today -- incest is wrong, same-sex relationships are wrong, as well as many other taboos today.  So, today, only a one man - one woman marriage is acceptable -- and not between family members.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

____________________

It first mentions it in Genesis.

Abraham married his half-sister, Isaac & Jacob married relatives. Lot, Abraham’s nephew, had two sons by his own daughters, though he was drunk when the act occurred.

In Exodus, Moses’ own father, Amram, married an aunt, his father’s sister, Jochebed.

 In 2 Samuel, Amnon, one of David’s sons, committed incest/rape against his half-sister, Tamar.

In 1 Corinthians, Paul gave permission for a man to marry his own daughter.

That is true.  But, as I mentioned, incest did not exist until God gave the Law to Israel through Moses.  Until then, it was not taboo.

Jimi, as usual, your comment make no sense.  I am not sure that even you understand what you are trying to say.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Which commandment specifically prohibits incest?

Hi Chick,

 
You wrote, "In 1 Corinthians, Paul gave permission for a man to marry his own daughter."

You are referring to the Scripture passage found in 1 Corinthians 7:36-38.   Yes, some have been confused about Paul's intent in that passage -- but, it was not to give permission for a father to marry his own daughter.   First, let's look at this passage in several popular Bible translations:

1 Corinthians 7:36-38 (nasb), "But if any man thinks that he is acting unbecomingly toward his virgin daughter, if she is past her youth, and if it must be so, let him do what he wishes, he does not sin; let her marry.   But he who stands firm in his heart, being under no constraint, but has authority over his own will, and has decided this in his own heart, to keep his own virgin daughter, he will do well.    So then both he who gives his own virgin daughter in marriage does well, and he who does not give her in marriage will do better."

1 Corinthians 7:36-38 (nkjv), "But if any man thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, if she is past the flower of youth, and thus it must be, let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry.    Nevertheless he who stands steadfast in his heart, having no necessity, but has power over his own will, and has so determined in his heart that he will keep his virgin, does well.   So then he who gives [her] in marriage does well, but he who does not give [her] in marriage does better."

1 Corinthians 7:36-38 (kjv),"But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of [her] age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.   Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well.   So then he that giveth [her] in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth [her] not in marriage doeth better."

This is what  Pastor David Guzik, Director of Calvary Chapel Bible College, Germany, writes in his Study Guide for 1 Corinthians 7- "Principles Regarding Marriage and Singleness."
http://www.blueletterbible.org...ians&ar=1Cr_7_36

4. (36-38) Paul deals with another question from the Corinthians: should I arrange a marriage for my daughter?

But if any man thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, if she is past the flower of youth, and thus it must be, let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry. Nevertheless he who stands steadfast in his heart, having no necessity, but has power over his own will, and has so determined in his heart that he will keep his virgin, does well. So then he who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better.

a. If any man thinks he is behaving improperly towards his virgin: The man Paul refers to is the father of a young woman or man of marrying age (his virgin). The behaving improperly has nothing to do with any kind of improper moral behavior, but with denying his daughter or son the right to marry, based on Paul’s valuing of singleness.

i. Remember that in this ancient culture, a young person’s parents had the primary responsibility for arranging their marriage. So, based on what Paul has already taught, should a Christian father recommend celibacy to his child?

ii. The term virgin includes the young of both sexes.

b. Let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry: Paul says it is not wrong for a father to allow his young daughter to marry, even allowing for the desirability of singleness at the present time.

c. But, because singleness does have its benefits, Paul will recommend it, not only to individuals, but also to fathers in regard to the marrying off of their daughters.

d. He who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better: For Paul, the choice between married and single was not the choice between good and bad, but between better and best. And for Paul, and the present circumstances, he regarded singleness as best.

So, Chick, I still hold the belief that incest was forbidden by God in the Law He gave to Israel through Moses.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Hi Jimi,

Read Leviticus 20.  The Law, as given in Leviticus, expands upon the Ten Commandments.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill's understanding of genetics is just as confused as his understanding of the beginnings of the universe.  Now he is trying to bring Leviticus out as useful, when even he says repeatedly elsewhere that it doesn't apply.  So this means that incest is a go ahead according to the Bible.  We know better on all accounts of course.

Seems gawd could have popped for a few more people, after all there was no shortage of dirt. It's very confusing. Eve from a rib-wouldn't that make her an adam clone and male instead of a woman? Incest was OK until it messed up the gene pool? hmmmmmm

And then it wasn't okay according to Leviticus, but Jesus overturned the laws in Leviticus, so now it is a-okay.

==
And this ridiculous explanation is written in the Bible where exactly??

CrustyMac, where can we find biblical evidence of this overturning by Jesus ?

You need to ask Bill.  Apparently it is okay to eat pork, too.  Who knew?

Did you ever get an answer to your question about divorce?

======================================================

Bill,,,,,,,,,,you're trying to rewrite the thread. Don't change the original

meaning of thought, I know you'll highjack it and attempt to tell me

God and everyone in North Alabama how and what to think.

I said nothing about the Trinity, I said nothing about the God Head.

I said God planned a Family structure that he wanted us to follow.

Why can't you accept what God wanted and stop telling him what he

really meant. Stop trying to correct God.

Stop telling Jesus his Mother isn't important and just womb material.

God isn't going to have a Son without a Mother, and this Mother is blessed.

He reinforced the family unit plan he wanted and started with Adam and Eve.

Everything was going fine until your bias hit the fan.

I don't want this to be taken in a bad way, but I believe you are unaware of

how stupid and prejudice you sound.

===============================================

I agree Best, I've always thought God created more people, and that would be

the quickest way to place different races of people in different places.

God created Adam from dirt, so there would be no problem to create Eve

from his rib. God could be showing us in this way, Adam and Eve

are of one flesh.

Mark 10: 6-9

[6] But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. [7] For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife. [8] And they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. [9] What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Gen 2: 24

Matt 19:5

Eph 5: 22

____________________

That's your opinion, & I have mine. Hundred's of people interpret scriptures every day.  No matter how much you may wish it, just because you say it, doesn't make it so.

I take anything you say with a grain of salt.

Hi Chick,

It is good for you to not just blindly believe what ANYONE tells you about Scripture and God.  We are all encouraged (Acts 17:11) to test the words of all who may be sharing or teaching -- against Scripture, the Bible.

Of course, this is telling us to take the full Word of God in study -- not, just the cherry-picked verses which you believe supports the point you are arguing.

If you will study Leviticus 20, I believe this book makes God's view of incest very clear.  But, until God gave Moses the Ten Commandments and the Law -- there was no such thing as incest.  If there is no law against it -- then, it cannot be counted as a sin.

Romans 5:13, "For until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law."

Chick, please DO take what I say, and what anyone else tells you about Scripture -- with a grain of salt -- until you personally test their teaching against Scripture. 

But, please do not look at Scripture with a tunnel vision -- only looking for ammunition with which to attack the writings or beliefs of another.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill 

Different skin colors, different hair colors and textures, different shaped facial features, all from the "same" person/man/adam???

----------------------------

I don't think so

Hi Jennifer,

That is true -- we all descended from Adam and Eve.  At that time they lived in a perfect paradise, the Garden of Eden.  So, the melanin in their skin pigment was normal -- and they were brown skinned.  Regarding their facial features and hair textures, we do not know for the Bible does not tell us.  Actually, the Bible does not tell us that they had brown skin -- science tells us this.

And, the different hair colors, skin colors, body and facial features -- we know about from science also.  You see, this level of evolution, micro evolution, i.e., adaptation, is true.  When, after the problem at Babel, God mixied up man's languages causing them to gather in like groups -- each group migrated to different lands. 

Those going to hot climates such as Africa needed more melanin in their skin pigments to protect them from the sun's UV rays.  So, they developed darker skin.  Those who migrated to the area we know as Europe, a milder climate, needed less protection from the sun -- so, they had less melanin.

But, the norm for man was brown skin -- and the rest of us adapted, or evolved, from that.

This is the true evolution -- adaptation to environmental and dietary changes -- causing different people groups to be different sizes, color, and with different facial and body features. 

But, inside, we are all the same -- as we were all created by God.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill, I know about melanin. I also know there shouldn't be all the other differences IF humans had descended from one person. There are more skin colors than black and white. And your god was so afraid of a tiny tower that he scattered people but now it's ok to intermingle? Sheesh

Hi Jennifer,

If you know about melanin -- you will now that different levels cause different skin colors or tones.  All colors are a variation between black and white.  So, yes, there are varying degrees of skin color in different areas of the world.

What caused changes in the physical features?   I would guess dietary differences.  We know that if a woman eats too much -- she gets fat.  And, we know that if a man drinks too much beer -- he gets a beer belly.  So, we can also apply those dietary principles to folks with other dietary habits.

Was God afraid of the Tower of Babel?  No.  The reason for God's decision was the disobedience of Nimrod and the people at Babel.  Adam's disobedience caused man's physical and spiritual death.  Nimrod's, and the people gathered with him, sin was once again disobedience -- causing God to confuse the languages.

Remember, in Genesis 1:27-28, we read, "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.  God blessed them; and God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.' "

And we see God speaking, in Genesis 11:7-8, " 'Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another's speech.'  So the LORD scattered them abroad from there over the face of the whole earth; and they stopped building the city.

So, why did God confuse the languages?  To force the people to "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth."  They could not fill the earth if they were all congregated in the plains of Shinar near Babel.         

Jennifer, thank you for asking.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Yeah, dietary principles explain blue eyes and sickle-cell anemia, schizophrenia, and a host of other "micro evolutionary" changes. >eye roll< 

Bill has to deny evolution, or his belief system collapses.  The creationists have to song and dance around evolution and can't deny the part of it that they call "micro evolution" any more than they can deny the earth moves around the sun.  What they ignore is that "micro-evolution" is just the short form of evolution, and it has taken man millions of years to get here.  The sad thing is that there is nowhere in the Bible that says the earth is only 6k years old, they have just done some fuzzy math and come up with that number.  It is sad that they are so ignorant regarding scientific reality, and is dangerous when they try and promote their ridiculous beliefs as science.

Hi Crusty,

You bring up several good points.  First, we know that the amount of melanin in skin pigment causes different skin coloring.  But, what about the eyes?  Guess what?  That is the result of melanin also. 

Eye Color

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_color

In humans, the pigmentation of the iris varies from light brown to black, depending on the concentration of melanin in the iris pigment epithelium (located the back of the iris), the melanin content within the iris stroma (located at the front of the iris), and the cellular density of the stroma.[4]  The appearance of blue, green, and hazel eyes results from the Rayleigh scattering of light in the stroma, a phenomenon similar to that which accounts for the blueness of the sky.  Neither blue nor green pigments are ever present in the human iris or ocular fluid.[3][5] Eye color is thus an instance of structural color and varies depending on the lighting conditions, especially for lighter-colored eyes.

Then, Crusty, you declare, "What they ignore is that "micro-evolution" is just the short form of evolution, and it has taken man millions of years to get here." 

Wrong, my Friend, you are confusing "micro evolution," i.e., adaptation -- with "macro evolution," i.e., Darwinian Evolution, where one species magically changes into another species.  In other words, a dog becomes a horse, a turtle becomes an alligator, etc.  Sorry, my Friend, that is stretching the imagination way beyond its boundaries.

Micro evolution is a fact.  Over hundreds or thousands of years, people and animals do adapt to different environmental conditions.  Skin color and eye color are perfect examples.

Next, you say, "There is nowhere in the Bible that says the earth is only 6k years old." 

That is true.  The Bible does not tell us exactly the age of the world and the universe.  But, it does give us some good clues.  However, science has given us better clues.  Science can determine the age of rocks, trees, etc., out to maybe 60,000 years.  But, beyond that is pure speculation.

So, what we do know is that Creation occurred thousands of years ago.  We do not know precisely how many thousands.  But, we do know that it was not millions or billions of years.

The millions or billions of years is necessary for those who cling to Darwinian Evolution -- for that is how long it would take for a mysteriously created simple lifeless cell floating in a mysteriously created primordial swamp -- to mysteriously evolve from a lifeless cell and become a living cell.  

Then, add on a few more billion years for that suddenly alive cell -- to evolve into a lemur, monkey, or ape -- on the way to becoming a human being.

Now, if anyone can believe that -- I have a bridge in Brooklyn I can sell you very cheap.

And, that, Crusty my Friend, is how the cookies crumble.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill   

 People like bill love that "fuzzy science". It's like they're cooking an "explanation/lie pie" and they're forced to use the truth in it. But since too much truth will ruin the "lie pie" they have to figure out a way to toss in a bit of truth, mix it up and hope it no one gets a big taste of it. Then if someone questions that tiny bit of truth in their recipe and asks about it, they resort to "fuzzy science" to "explain" the taste. As bad as they hate the ingredient "truth", they're forced to use at least a little of it or their "lie pie" won't bake at all.

what do you know about science best.

     i might just give you a pop quiz to find out what you know

====================================

No Bill, not at all, God confused the languages because the tower wasn't

being built for the glory of God. It was also an insult to him.

Gen 1: 27-28 has nothing to do with the Tower.

The change in physical features in people is detemined by the environment 

in which they live. Does dietary differences make the Black man's hair flat as

a ribbon, and asian hair is round? Beer bellies and fat women change only

fat, dead or both, Not hair, eyes, nose and all the rest.

you're ridiculous to even think that way.

_________________

There is so much wrong with this, I'm just gonna refer you to any decent 10th grade science book.  You have no concept of the basic tenets of evolution, genetics, or even basic biology, so I can't even begin to have an intelligent conversation with you about the subject or any other of your creationist ridiculousness.  The only "we" that you can claim to be a part of in this case is the Liars for Jesus, who wear perpetual scientific blinders in order to keep their house of cards from collapsing.  Given that you won't educate yourself in scientific matters, especially basic biology, I suggest you go and find some Thomas Aquinas to read - he took care of your biblical problem centuries ago.

My prescription for you:

1.  A basic science course

2. Deprogramming

3. Intense psychotherapy

What about teeth enamel?

I think that comes in between Lucky Strike taupe and west coast green.

The Bible might tell us if you eat the right foods, like corn, you can have

those golden yellow choppers just like Billie's.

Crust-0-matic

10^th grade science huh?

Just what I suspected. LOL

    You bust me up sometimes.  The 6k package w/instruction will do you just fine.