| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
romans120
Resident Theist
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 2051
Local time: 3:22 PM
Location: The God Shaped Hole in Your Heart
|
 Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 3:18 pm Post subject: |
  |
|
| Moloth wrote: | | romans120 wrote: | | Moloth wrote: | | romans120 wrote: | | Moloth wrote: | "there is no reason to not assume they had other children in quick succession. "
yes, there is. its not in the bible. are you adding stuff the bible, Romans? do you consider yourself biblical author?
are you doing the "well, what god MEANT was... what Jesus MEANT was... what the bible MEANT was..." thing? |
No I'm not adding anything all they needed to do was have sex If the Bible doesn't say either way you are free to assume the natural course of things. Some people are fertile and can pop out the little varmints at will. besides my argument doesn't live or die on that point. It was not common (their are a few exceptions) to have a girl listed in the genealogy yet we know there were girls obviously born so to assume there were girls born not mentioned in scripture is very reasonable and does not add or take away from the text |
yes, it DOES add to the text. you're adding in entire generations and people that the bible does not mention, in order for the (nonsensical) story to make sense.
you ARE doing the "well, what the Bible MEANT was..." thing. look, either follow the bible or cherry pick/edit it how you see fit. at least be honest about it. |
I know how genealogies work, the author of Genesis also knows how genealogies work. He does not have to explicitly give every detail if everybody knows the mechanics of what a genealogy is. I am sorry but the Cain argument boils down to nit picking. Genealogies are not family trees it is a list of heads of households. Households demand both male and female members. the fact that there is a head of household implies a household which implies the birth of female members into that household.
If you are not educated on the topic of scripture what is somebody to do other then tell you what it means. if you are engaging in discussion |
really? how do you know this? what evidence do you have? seems to me that the evidence, the Bible itself, is VERY clear and precise.
who are YOU to question and alter the bible to suit you're own means? who do you think you are? King James?
Christians... sheesh. "Believe in the Bible! its the perfect word of GOD! er... but not that part.. it actually means something other than what it says... but.. uh.. Believe in the Bible!" |
What? are you off your riddalin or something? We know what genealogies are because they exist both within the Bible and outside of the Bible. Their are myriads and myriads of jewish genealogies. Even liberal scholars would say that Genesis was authored by a Jew, thus we know what is intended by a genealogy in scripture. We know what they are, we know how they are constructed, we know what the practices were that governed how they were compiled. The Bible is clear and is very precise and when it says Cain had sex with his wife in Nod that is precisely what it means. You are the one questioning how that is possible. The genealogies show that it is possible. Nothing more nothing less
_________________
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. Romans 1:19-20
Check out my weblog at http://romans120.wordpress.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
Philosophos
Do it
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Posts: 9289
Local time: 5:22 PM
Location: Where Scum Are
|
| Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| romans120 wrote: | | I know how genealogies work, the author of Genesis also knows how genealogies work. He does not have to explicitly give every detail if everybody knows the mechanics of what a genealogy is. I am sorry but the Cain argument boils down to nit picking. Genealogies are not family trees it is a list of heads of households. |
I'm sorry, but Genesis 4:1-2 doesn't look like the typical "begat"-fest that actually is indicative of genealogies, so I'm not sure where you get this from.
Plus, you contradict yourself. Assume it is a genealogy (which it isn't). You claim genealogies only list the heads of households. Fine. But how is Abel a head of any household when he is killed a few verses later?
_________________
The whores and politicians will shout 'save us'...
...and I'll whisper 'no'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 23071
Local time: 4:22 PM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
| Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
*points at Philos post*
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Missionary
Guest
Local time: 7:22 AM
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Philosophos wrote: | | romans120 wrote: | | I know how genealogies work, the author of Genesis also knows how genealogies work. He does not have to explicitly give every detail if everybody knows the mechanics of what a genealogy is. I am sorry but the Cain argument boils down to nit picking. Genealogies are not family trees it is a list of heads of households. |
I'm sorry, but Genesis 4:1-2 doesn't look like the typical "begat"-fest that actually is indicative of genealogies, so I'm not sure where you get this from.
Plus, you contradict yourself. Assume it is a genealogy (which it isn't). You claim genealogies only list the heads of households. Fine. But how is Abel a head of any household when he is killed a few verses later? |
If you'll note:
Genesis 4:1-2 (KJV)
1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.
2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
By your logic, Over the course of 2 verses while only pausing to breath once at the end of verse 1, Eve bore a son Cain followed immediately by Abel who both wiped off the afterbirth and began keeping sheep and tilling the ground. Obviously this is not the case.
Chapter 4 is a genealogy as evidenced by vs. 16-26. It maps two distinctive lines; that of Abel and the line of Cain. As it so happened the very beginning of these two lines is marred by a crime; the first homicide in history. The very headlines of such a shocking event require at least a summery review of the most important details. This is important to begin the recording of mans lineage so that 1) we learn of the immediate effects of sin; 2) learn of the appropriate response in worshipping God; and 3) that we understand what happened to Abel.
It's also worthy of noting that on occasion in the course of scribing a lineage that summery details of interest or importance are noted about that person as evidenced in 5:22&24 concerning Enoch and 5:29 concerning Noah.
Genesis 3:20 (KJV)
20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
This verse tells us exactly what it means; Eve is the mother of all the living prior to the birth of the first two men. It is like ly that Eve did in fact go forth and bear as instructed and bore girls. She could likely have bore several or many before the boys were born and certainly bore more afterwards. This is evidenced from 5:4
Genesis 5:4 (KJV)
4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters
We know 5:4 is speaking of Adam as opposed to Seth because we see Adam's total age at time of death in vs.5 and Seth's line (Enos) and children in vs.6-7.
As a result, Cain and Abel both had pick of the litter. It is also probable that at that time in history, young men and ladies would likely come together shortly after puberty considering high schools weren't built yet and there was no prom or grad school.
1) What we do know is that Eve was the "mother of all living" 3:20
2) Adam "begat sons and daughters" 5:4
3) No daughters names are listed
C) The sons of Adam and Eve (Cain and Abel) took wives of their sisters.
We can assume without knowing for certain that Able did have daughters prior to his death. But we know for certain that he did not have sons. Otherwise we would see the line continue and Seth would have represented the third line.
After reporting of the incident regarding Cain and Abel, the genealogy continues with Cains line and move to Nod, while the Godly line of Adam was replaced with by the birth of Seth. Chapter 5 is a restatement of the Godly line that stretches from Seth to Noah and is further evidence that chapter 4 was in fact the beginning of the lineage of men of God. It's also worth noting that Chapters and verses were not divisioned until much later so we can assume that the account from the exhile at Eden to Noah is one single unbroken account which provides an explanation at the beginning of the lineage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philosophos
Do it
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Posts: 9289
Local time: 5:22 PM
Location: Where Scum Are
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Missionary wrote: | | By your logic, Over the course of 2 verses while only pausing to breath once at the end of verse 1, Eve bore a son Cain followed immediately by Abel who both wiped off the afterbirth and began keeping sheep and tilling the ground. Obviously this is not the case. |
I'm honestly a little shocked that you want to promote civil discussion through the side of your mouth, while churning out sophistry like this from the other.
I would have responded to your post, but it's clear that you're interested in cheap victories over civil discourse.
_________________
The whores and politicians will shout 'save us'...
...and I'll whisper 'no'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Missionary
Guest
Local time: 7:22 AM
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Philosophos wrote: |
I would have responded to your post, but it's clear that you're interested in cheap victories over civil discourse. |
No cheap victory. I was responding to "Fine. But how is Abel a head of any household when he is killed a few verses later?"
I was under the impression you didn't understand how it was possible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
