Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

I always hear atheists say that bananas, monkeys, humans and dirt all share the same dna to try and prove that man evolved from amoebas to monkeys to humans or whatever it is they believe.
???

---

Well, see, until you take the time and make the effort to understand what it is that they actually do believe, you won't be very convincing in trying to refute it. Not all atheists are scientists, and not all scientists are atheists, so generalizations are dangerous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oneguyinohio

Isn't dirt formed by the decay of living organisms? It's called decomposition or some would say composting.... No, not all dirt forms that way, but mix it up a bit and its not hard to understand that dirt does have the potential to contain the DNA in cells... That logic doesn't really prove much. If you look for the building blocks of DNA in soil, want to wager as to what you will find?

---

Well, as a scientific term, I'm not sure "dirt" has a precise definition, but I guess in the context of this discussion, I'd say it is the non-living part of soil. SOIL is a mixture of the products of weathering stone and decaying life forms, mainly plants. DNA is a complex molecule found within living organisms that fragments and disintegrates relatively quickly (geologically speaking) after life of the organism ends. Still, a healthy soil is also home to an astounding variety of life-forms, so I'm sure it would be hard to draw a precise line between the living (DNA-containing) and the non-living components of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oneguyinohio

All of the various versions of religious texts seem to have been "given" to some man to share with the rest of the world. If someone today were to write such a book and tell the world it was all based on things that God told them, how many believers would there be?

---

More than you might think, actually. It's been less than 200 years since Joseph Smith got his revelation, and worldwide membership in the church he founded is now close to 13 million. LDS Newsroom - Statistical Information. The Urantia Book has only been around since the fifties, but more than half a million copies in seven languages have been sold.

My impression is that revelations of this sort are coming thick and fast, and there seems to be a market for them. Yes, it's a niche market, but it's big enough to be economically viable, and information technology is continually bringing down the cost of publication and thus threshold of viability. With the internet, print-on-demand, etc. the start-up costs of prophet-hood are falling fast, so we can probably expect lots of new suppliers to enter the market.

Joseph Smith was one of the people I was thinking of as I wrote that post. I lived very near to Kirtland, Ohio for over 10 years which is where Joseph Smith was before the group went west...


How does this sound for a first verse? In the beginning appeared a great light, and that light was Zigbot.

I also had thought of Joseph Smith. I grew up near Palmyra NY where he found the golden plates.

As far as I know, those golden plates are missing or something right? Has anyone else ever seen them? Maybe I'll have to post it in the treasure hunting thread??

I have the plates in my home safe.

Right next to the Holy Grail? Heck, might as well throw in the golden goblet.

Not the Holy Grail. It fell down into a crack in the earth and is gone forever. And I haven't found the Ark yet in that huge warehouse.

I do have the two stones that contain the Ten Commandments. They were too big for my safe, so we set them up in the butterfly garden next to the sundial and the gnome in the back yard.

And here I was just planning an expedition to go and get those stones for my patio. Oh well, I'll just use some gopher wood (when I locate Noah's yaght) to build a deck instead.

When you find that warehouse, let me know, I think they might have a couple of old rugged crosses lying around... somewhere near Peter's sword.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

In fact I fully believe that they had children prior to being sent out of the garden but it was not mentioned since it had no effect on the story of creation and the sin of mankind. My reason for that was part of the punishment was for eve to have pain in child birth, not much of a punishment if she had not known no pain in child birth before.

---

That's an interesting idea I've never heard before. My sister had 6 children and she said none of them hurt when she gave birth. I guess God decided not to punish her for Adam and Eve's sin? (She's had a hard life anyway.)

Fr. Chuck:
Chapter 4 of Genesis makes a point of stating: "And the man knew Eve his wife; and she conceived and bore Cain, and said: 'I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord." This was AFTER the expulsion from Eden. Since the authors of Genesis placed such import on the FIRST BORN, it would seem rather amiss for them NOT to have recorded any sons born to Adam and Eve before CAIN. It also calls to question Eve's adjunct... "with the help of the Lord"... would previous children have been conceived WITHOUT the help of the Lord??

I believe we are enjoined NOT to add or take away from the bible, are we not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tertullian

Fr. Chuck:
Chapter 4 of Genesis makes a point of stating: "And the man knew Eve his wife; and she conceived and bore Cain, and said: 'I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord." This was AFTER the expulsion from Eden. Since the authors of Genesis placed such import on the FIRST BORN, it would seem rather amiss for them NOT to have recorded any sons born to Adam and Eve before CAIN. It also calls to question Eve's adjunct...."with the help of the Lord"....would previous children have been conceived WITHOUT the help of the Lord?????

I believe we are enjoined NOT to add or take away from the bible, are we not?

---

True but how do you account for Cain's wife? Where did she come from?
Something HAS to be added... to include his wife since no other women are mentioned before this.
Although I believe you are right it wasn't Eve having other children although I believe she most likely had children after Cain and Able. The Bible talks like his wife came from outside the family.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

True but how do you account for Cain's wife? Where did she come from?
Something HAS to be added....to include his wife since no other women are mentioned before this.
although I believe you are right it wasn't Eve having other children although I believe she most likely had children after Cain and Able. The Bible talks like his wife came from outside the family.

---

Cain's wife is a whole other ball of wax. If taken in it's 'literal' sense it leads to one of two conclusions... either there was another set of 'first' parents who settled in the land of NOD, or Cain's wife was the result of an incestuous relationship. THAT can of worms should not even be opened!!

The Bible confirms that EVE had other children AFTER Cain and Able... there was a third son, SETH (the only other one named... Genesis 4:25) and some daughters and other sons... Genesis 5:4)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tertullian

Cain's wife is a whole other ball of wax. If taken in it's 'literal' sense it leads to one of two conclusions....either there was another set of 'first' parents who settled in the land of NOD, or Cain's wife was the result of an incestuous relationship. THAT can of worms should not even be opened!!!

---

Too late, the can is open and the worms are slithering over the edge. Do you take it in a 'non-literal' sense, or do you prefer one of the two conclusions you mention?

I once heard that Cain's wife was an ape like creature... leading to minorities... No, I'm not saying I believed it, but that there are people who preach that!

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ordinaryguy

Too late, the can is open and the worms are slithering over the edge. Do you take it in a 'non-literal' sense, or do you prefer one of the two conclusions you mention?

---

It is not of consequence which I prefer: If the entire First Parents scenario is to be taken literally, it can only lead to the inevitable taboo: incest. It has been bruited about that many, many generations passed before Cain killed Abel and found a wife in the land of Nod... presupposing 'cousins' ten or twenty times removed... but that would obiviate a belief in the established biblical time line... and THAT can of worms would lead to questioning the literal twenty-four hour, six-day creation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tertullian

:)

If the entire First Parents scenario is to be taken literally, it can only lead to the inevitable taboo: incest.

---

... or bestiality?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tertullian

:)

It is not of consequence which I prefer: If the entire First Parents scenario is to be taken literally, it can only lead to the inevitable taboo: incest. It has been bruited about that many, many generations passed before Cain killed Abel and found a wife in the land of Nod...presupposing 'cousins' ten or twenty times removed....but that would obiviate a belief in the established biblical time line....and THAT can of worms would lead to questioning the literal twenty-four hour, six-day creation.

---

Yes, literalists must be vigilant not to slip off that "narrow way" and onto the slippery slope of questioning and reasoning and thinking about causes and consequences. I feel for them. I used to be one, so in their eyes I'm sure my story would be a cautionary tale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oneguyinohio

....or beastiality??

---

ONLY if you believe that Yahweh actually tried to find a helpmeet for Adam among the animals... as is suggested when Yahweh realizes "it is not good for the man to be alone" and begins to parade the animals for Adam to choose.

Always wondered why Yahweh did not realize WHEN he created Adam that it would not be good for the man to be alone. :)

God commanded the species to be kept 'to their kind'
As I said Cain could not be held accountable to having a sister be his wife when that law didn't exist at that time. Although because the Bible says from the land of NOD I take it as meaning there may have been another group of people on the earth that God didn't feel necessary to include in the Bible just as he didn't feel it important to mention many women unless they were important to the whole scheme of things.