146 posts in this topic

No. I do not think Abel was Cain's wife. I know they were brothers.

My question is: How did the genealogy proceed from there?

 

In other words, who is Enoch's mother?

I believe another poster quoted from Jubilees of the Apocrypha that Cain's wife was named Awan.

 

To put it another way, Enoch's mother is also Enoch's aunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I'm not required to prove anything because I'm not making a positive claim.  I'm disputing the claims of people such as you who claim god DOES exist, yet have never provided any verifiable evidence if its existence.

 

You have no proof, therefore I can quite happily state that your god does not exist.

I have proof: the OT and NT canons of the Bible. The other assorted proofs are in the hands of historians, and excerpts of these proofs can be found by Google.

 

The issue here is that you discount my proofs entirely. Interestingly, I don't see you calling out others to prove their beliefs that extraterrestrial life surely must exist, even in the absence of evidence. Why the double standard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Incest as a sin was non-existent before Moses. It was necessary for survival for sibling-couples to procreate. What an irony, that evolutionists would exalt eugenics and justify all sorts of horrendous behaviour in the name of survival, but give special and opposite treatment to this one.

 

 

idk why you folk think evolution/natural selection = eugenics. Eugenics is essentially the opposite of natural selection & there are plenty of scientific and ethical objections to eugenics. Accepting evolution doesn't automatically make someone an advocate of eugenics. That's just foolish nonsense.

 

But when you get all of your scientific info from Answers in Genesis or some loony religious blog it isn't surprising a word like evolutionist (don't you mean evilutionist!) becomes nothing more than an ignorant pejorative.

 

No. I do not think Abel was Cain's wife. I know they were brothers.

My question is: How did the genealogy proceed from there?

 

In other words, who is Enoch's mother?

 

Edit: Sorry, didn't read the previous post by Compl3x before posting.

 

It's irrelevant to him. It wouldn't matter if Cain raped his mother and Enoch was the offspring. In this time period anything goes, apparently.

 

It is also worthwhile to note that Awan isn't accepted by all Christians as Enoch's mother. Most don't even bother to try and answer who Enoch's mother was. Boring-as-batshit topic.

 

 

Actually, I'm not required to prove anything because I'm not making a positive claim.  I'm disputing the claims of people such as you who claim god DOES exist, yet have never provided any verifiable evidence if its existence.

 

You have no proof, therefore I can quite happily state that your god does not exist.

 

 

Burden of proof. Burden of proof. Burden of proof. -- A concept many theists simply cannot grasp & usually try to entirely dodge by using the old "but it is about faith" or "you must believe!" or some other trite statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have proof: the OT and NT canons of the Bible. The other assorted proofs are in the hands of historians, and excerpts of these proofs can be found by Google.

 

Sorry, but you cannot use a the bible to prove the bible, that's circular reasoning and not valid.

 

The issue here is that you discount my proofs entirely. Interestingly, I don't see you calling out others to prove their beliefs that extraterrestrial life surely must exist, even in the absence of evidence. Why the double standard?

 

I question anyone making positive claims without evidence. I don't believe in UFO's, alien kidnappings or any of that nonsense.  I do believe that there's a very good statistical probability that life exists elsewhere in the universe, but I only have the evidence of life occurring on THIS planet as evidence towards it's probable existence elsewhere.  I absolutely do not claim it as a certainty because that would be impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It takes a huge suspension of belief in reality and history to claim a lack of evidence for God... not just any God, but the one crucified by the Romans for claiming to the Jews that he is.

 

 

 

Please by all means provide said evidence of a god, at no point in human history has there EVER been actual evidence for god. And no the bible is not evidence of god, period, that is a FACT. As for Jesus, I believe the person who is said to be the man existed, but he was still a man and nothing more. Ill look over any evidence you may have that that person was a god as long as it's actual evidence and not some bible scripture which doesn't count as evidence. Until then, the only suspension of reality is claiming evidence exists without actually having any. 

 

 

 

 

No unicorns, leprechauns, Smurfs, Harry Potters, Mr. Hankeys the Christmas Poo or Godzillas ever claimed to be God and demonstrated so with fulfillment of prophecies and documented miracles.

 

 

 

The fact that you missed the point on this goes to show your complete lack of basic understanding. Claiming god exists because of some book is the equivalent of saying all those other creatures exists because they too were in books. The bible does not document miracles, as you can no verify those miracles ever happened, that is a FACT. Facts are something you clearly have a hard time understanding. 

 

 

 

The faith I speak of is that built on a strong tripod - personal experience, verifiable and accurate historical accounts, and present reality. Personal experience is indeed subjective, although it is impossible for people to hallucinate the same thing simultaneously. That is why, in the historical accounting of the Bible, multiple eyewitnesses were present at the same time.

 

 

 

Again provide these so called verifiable facts that don't just come off the pages of the bible and then we can talk, til then you have nothing other then faith, that's it. Claiming stories of supernatural events happened because someone else claims to have witnessed them is about as factual as stating Peter Pan exists because some kids stated they went flying with him. Eyewitnesses to accounts that happened 2000 yrs ago, are pretty poor witnesses, you can't even prove those stories were even told by those who claimed to witnesses them. Til you can, you don't even have eye witnesses, just stories told down from someone over and over til they were eventually written down.

 

 

 

Historicity comes from the uninterrupted timeline of Christiandom -- from the apostles, to their disciples, to the first bishops of churches which survived the persecution of the Roman Empire, to the official state religion under the Byzantine Empire, to the Catholic Church as well as cloistered scribes and monks of the Middle Ages, and finally to the Reformers in the era right before the Renaissance. So it flabbergasts me to encounter anyone who claims to have a serious intellectual mind to say so effortlessly that there is no evidence.

 

Documented miracles -- presented as they are in the accurate and verifiable historical documents. Miracles can co-exist with science; in fact, given that us mortal humans are limited to the experiences of everyday physics, miracles provide incontrovertible proof of a higher dimension which has mechanisms that are utterly different from 4D spacetime and effortlessly superior to it.

 

Present reality - the continued survival of Israel despite multiple attempts to destroy its bloodlines and despite its own stupidity in political matters (the latter is referring to the State of Israel, not Israel as a tribe). The Jews survived economic discrimination in pre-WWI Europe, a genocide in WWII. What seemed like a curse became a blessing: their diaspora from Europe assures their continuity by leaving distinct cultural remnants in every nation. Second point - the continued presence of Christianity in this world despite persecution and torture of various degrees in all the nations.

 

That is what faith is about, when properly defined. In contrast, your faith in alien life lacks this tripod, and even contravenes basic chemistry. Cytosine hydrolysis, oxygen/ozone paradox, chirality of amino acids (L) and sugars (D) are just 3 of many hiccups in an attempted naturalistic origin of life theory.

 

Uninterrupted? What evidence can you show that is true? Hell, even Jesus's youth to young adult is an interrupted story, it doesn't exist. Again yet again, you need to be told that stories from the bible don't make them true just because they were written down on paper. Someone claiming they were healed or saw someone else healed is not a documented fact of a miracle, it's a story, period. Even in this day, miracles are not proven facts, so it's utterly retarded to think miracle stories told from 2000 yrs ago are somehow true. 

 

Present reality is Israel survives because they get help from us and others to help them survive. You want to think that's a prophecy that's on you. FYI, the Jews are far from the only ones to suffer through a genocide, though I think they are one of the few to have an ego from it. 

 

As for faith, as I stated before, I have faith in the odds of alien life existing, we dont have evidence of their existence so I can't say they do as a fact. The big difference between you is that Im open to being wrong and I understand that we may not know in my lifetime. 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguing that there is no proof for Jesus is as good as arguing that there is no proof of the Roman Empire.

 

http://christianity.about.com/od/easter/a/7-Proofs-Of-The-Resurrection.htm

 

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

 

 

Answers in Genesis did the heavy lifting of dissecting and compiling the host of scientific evidence that counter the theory of evolution. It is unbecoming of an intellectual to fail to recognise scientific facts for what they are, and to disregard them because of their usage in a particular scientific debate. Saying "we are here because of a naturalistic origin of life" and "there is a naturalistic origin of life, hence we are here" is circular. The Bible confirming itself is not, because all it takes is a single self-contradiction to defeat its self-consistency. Aside from misinterpretations from erroneous contexts and poor understanding of journalistic reporting (which all don't qualify), there are none. Working from the axiom of a good God who does not lie and can not lie, the accusation of circularity is also voided.

 

The Wiki entry on eugenics says nothing that contravenes the tenets of evolution. Where we have natural selection in nature to weed out the unfit and weak, we have human agents who aid the process along via artificial selection along the same principle - weeding out the weak and the unfit by rendering them unable to reproduce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguing that there is no proof for Jesus is as good as arguing that there is no proof of the Roman Empire.

 

http://christianity.about.com/od/easter/a/7-Proofs-Of-The-Resurrection.htm

 

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

 

 

Answers in Genesis did the heavy lifting of dissecting and compiling the host of scientific evidence that counter the theory of evolution. It is unbecoming of an intellectual to fail to recognise scientific facts for what they are, and to disregard them because of their usage in a particular scientific debate. Saying "we are here because of a naturalistic origin of life" and "there is a naturalistic origin of life, hence we are here" is circular. The Bible confirming itself is not, because all it takes is a single self-contradiction to defeat its self-consistency. Aside from misinterpretations from erroneous contexts and poor understanding of journalistic reporting (which all don't qualify), there are none. Working from the axiom of a good God who does not lie and can not lie, the accusation of circularity is also voided.

 

The Wiki entry on eugenics says nothing that contravenes the tenets of evolution. Where we have natural selection in nature to weed out the unfit and weak, we have human agents who aid the process along via artificial selection along the same principle - weeding out the weak and the unfit by rendering them unable to reproduce.

 

Are you telling me there are no contradictions in the bible? OK then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also, I don't think I'm not evil. I know, for a fact, that I'm not evil.  Evil is defined in the bible as an act against god. As god does not exist, I cannot commit any acts against it and therefore cannot be evil.

 

 

According to the Bible each of us is evil because we came into the world full of sin, as a gift from Adam. Also, just to point out, that evil can be against god but it's considered evil to do harm to your neighbor, with your neighbor being essentially all mankind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is out flawed logic? Even if you narrow your search field to earthlike planets even we've found similar ones in the extremely tiny area of space that we can see. 

 

Remember when Hubble looked at an area of space thought to be empty? Look at what it saw. 

 

hubble-deep-field-northern-detail-rw-cap

Where's the "you are here" arrow??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion used to help to progress our understanding of the world around us. Sadly, that stopped being true thousands of years ago.

 

There is by far more evidence that shows that aliens almost certainly do exist than there is for the existence of God...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguing that there is no proof for Jesus is as good as arguing that there is no proof of the Roman Empire.

 

http://christianity.about.com/od/easter/a/7-Proofs-Of-The-Resurrection.htm

 

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

 

 

Answers in Genesis did the heavy lifting of dissecting and compiling the host of scientific evidence that counter the theory of evolution. It is unbecoming of an intellectual to fail to recognise scientific facts for what they are, and to disregard them because of their usage in a particular scientific debate. Saying "we are here because of a naturalistic origin of life" and "there is a naturalistic origin of life, hence we are here" is circular. The Bible confirming itself is not, because all it takes is a single self-contradiction to defeat its self-consistency. Aside from misinterpretations from erroneous contexts and poor understanding of journalistic reporting (which all don't qualify), there are none. Working from the axiom of a good God who does not lie and can not lie, the accusation of circularity is also voided.

 

The Wiki entry on eugenics says nothing that contravenes the tenets of evolution. Where we have natural selection in nature to weed out the unfit and weak, we have human agents who aid the process along via artificial selection along the same principle - weeding out the weak and the unfit by rendering them unable to reproduce.

 

 

 

First off Answers in Genesis is a heavily biased for obvious reasons. Second plenty of people believe the Jesus the man was real, but a man ONLY and not some supernatural figure. There is zero evidence of any of the supernatural events from the bible, and yet again NO the scriptures do not count as evidence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about this survey but I'm sure I'm Orthodox Christian and believe in aliens as well :alien:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe in God and I believe in the possibility of alien life.  God is the creator.  He created the heavens and the earth, the creatures on the land and the creatures under the seas.  The Bible teaches that He created man in his own image.

 

However, nowhere does it state that this is all He ever created.  God the creator could have gone on to create other universes, worlds, and beings.  In actuality, the better question is: If God is the omnipotent creator, why wouldn't He go on to create other life?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Trieste Or whatever he calls himself now:

 

I would like you to continue this family tree:

 

Adam/Eve -> Cain|Abel -> ?

 

 

That would be exhaustive.  However, the point you are trying to make does pose a number of questions for theological debate.  Simply that at the time of Abel's murder, there were only four people (presumably) on earth.  So, how does humanity continue?  We obviously did.  The following is all there is about it in the Bible.  Cain was cast from Eden, he dwelt in the land of Nod, there he knew his wife, and she bore him a son.  However, if you continue on in Genesis, you will note that Cain builds a city.  I would imagine this feat would take considerably more than just a father, his son, and wife. So, where did all of these people come from - and why were they not mentioned previously?

 

"....went out from the presence of the LORD and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch..."

 

Again, this is a subject of religious debate that has been ongoing for hundreds if not thousands of years.  Some nonbelievers would decry it as yet another Biblical inconsistency; I would say it just adds more to the mystery of our creation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merry Xmas Aliens. :D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merry Xmas Aliens. :D

 

Xenomorphs ######in' love Xmas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merry Xmas Aliens. :D

 

Thank you, Hum, and a Happy Holidays to you. :alien:

 

By the way, Hum, have you had your anal probe this year?  :shifty:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

By the way, Hum, have you had your anal probe this year?  :shifty:

 

 

Are you upset he didn't come to you for his annual probe? I am sure he isn't seeing other probists, he has just been busy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you upset he didn't come to you for his annual probe? I am sure he isn't seeing other probists, he has just been busy.

 

Very upset, I have quotas to meet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.