Quote:

found none that suited him as a proper companion



At the moment I can't check the exact lines in the bible, so perhaps it's a bit more vague indeed. However, they didn't even discover they were actually naked but did have sex right? (they had not eaten from the apples?) I'd say 'companion' does indicate 'sexual partner'.



I'm not saying they didn't have sex, or that they weren't created with the purpose of sex in mind. What I'm saying is that there's nothing in the text to indicate that eve was created primarily as a sexual reward.

The first time the bible indicates them 'knowing' each other is some unspecified time after the curse. So, perhaps Adam's sexual reward is associated with cursing the entire creation.

Quote:

Well, I know from my experience that sex is never coincidental. Besides that, weren't they going crazy like rabbits anyways, judging from the huge amount of children they must have created? (one thing that's clearly impossible gene-wise)



The bible speaks of Cain and Abel directly (later on Seth). However, there's no way they didn't have more children, and the bible even says he had more kids. The question is, how many children did they have? There's no real way to know, at least from a plain reading of the bible.

I just don't get what's impossible about that, gene-wise, though.

Quote:

King David returned to jerusalem after defeating the enemies
"You did not fulfill God's will "
"Yes I did "
"No you did not, women and kids are still alive "
"Why should God want the death of women and kids ?"
"How do you dare to comment God's will ?"

King David got back and the Lord's will was fulfilled

Is it true ? I so how can religious people justifiy something like that ?
Unless Bible have ben written by wild people in a wild world




From what I understand, and I would have to research this more fully myself, it was written in a wild world. The general consensus appears to be that the ancient world (around those times) was largely on the edge of descending into chaos, unlike now where there's relative stability.

That being said, you have to ask yourself a question. Is there ever a time when its permissable (not necessarily good, however) to kill children?

You also have to ask yourself if it is God's will, does that mean its necessarily a 'good' thing?

I don't know the specifics of the event offhand, but just some general things to keep in mind. Many nations were in the nasty habit of harrassing the Jews repeatedly, attacking them and other nations, stealing their people to live in servitude or whatnot. If the Jews were justified in destroying the armies of those nations, as perhaps the case can be made, they may not have had any choice but to destroy ALL of the people in those nations in order to secure a safe future. In other words, it doesn't do much good to have the children growing up and wanting revenge. Perhaps a bit of unpleasant bloodshed early on can save more bloodshed later in time?

I wouldn't look at these events just on the surface, with our modern societies in mind. I had a problem with some of these things too, but they begin to make some sense when you consider the historical and social background.

Unfortunately, I've barely had time to barely scratch the surface.


JCL, upon reflection, its interesting to note how your view of modern society has been reflected in your 'theory.' I could perhaps be wrong, this is just my theory. However, you refer to there being one account of creation for the enlightened, what you would consider the Theory of Evolution for its time. Then there's the creation account for the 'ignorants', if you will.

It seems to me you've imposed your own ideas of the 'enlightened' darwinists and the 'ignorant' religious folks of the modern day, onto the Genesis account. The parallel, to me, seems too obvious to ignore.

I'm not trying to ridicule your idea, but it seemed to me like a subconscious (or perhaps conscious) way for you to reassert how you feel about the differences between, perhaps, evolutionists and 'anti-evolutionists.'

Last edited by Irish_Farmer; 12/08/06 03:42.
"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."