06-09-2003 22:45									#31
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Stipulate that the Bible is true. Given that stipulation, you must believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans. Logically, then, Cain married a sister - or possibly a niece or something like that.

The argument I've heard against that is that nowhere in the Bible does it say God didn't create any other humans separately from Adam & Eve after the Fall. So Cain's finding a wife could be implying that God created other humans in other regions.

What am I doing? It's all a bunch of hooey!

	06-09-2003 22:48									#32
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Possibly Noah's wife, or the wives of his sons, were of a different race?

Presumably one of his son's wives would have to be...but they hardly could account for ALL the different races that have arisen since the supposed Flood (which, according to Biblical chronology, would had to have been c. 2350 BCE).

I think the Tower of Babel, which was post-Noah, is the only hope of a Biblical explanation for the sheer number of different races.

	06-09-2003 22:48									#33
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Stipulate that the Bible is true. Given that stipulation, you must believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans. Logically, then, Cain married a sister - or possibly a niece or something like that. Stipulate the Bible isn't true. Cain didn't go to the land of Nod to find a wife, therefore we aren't having this discussion. If you want to argue from the Bible, though, my explanation is the only one which can be correct. If you want to argue the Bible isn't true, go ahead, that's another debate, and it's fairly irrelevant as to our specific question.

I don't think it's an either/or question. I happen to believe there are some things in the bible that are true, and others that are not.

	06-09-2003 22:50									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: I don't know about you Imran, but most of the women I know wouldn't like the 'equality' that would be afforded to them under an Islamic society. And when I mean Islamic, I mean one of those countries like Iran under the 'enlightened' rule of the imams.

Most Islamic societies aren't theocratic. I find it interesting that the three largest Islamic countries have had women heads of state (Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh), while the same can't be said of the three largest Christian countries.

	06-09-2003 22:50									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Wasn't the Tower of Babel meant to be one explanation? While it doesn't explicitely say God created different races, it can be inferred by his other actions.

I can't remember...did this supposedly happen before the flood? If so, then we are back to a single couple - Noah and his wife.

quote: Of course, many argue that the "Mark of Cain" is dark skin, i.e. all dark-skinned peoples are descendants of Cain. This is nonsensical, however, because if you take the Bible at face value, God slaughtered everyone except Noah and his family during the Flood, so its from them that all humanity would share its origin...

Yep.

	06-09-2003 22:51									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: The argument I've heard against that is that nowhere in the Bible does it say God didn't create any other humans separately from Adam & Eve after the Fall.

I suppose that's a possibility, although it brings up an interesting question. Were these humans created with a sin nature, and with original sin? Remember, these things were a result of the sin of Adam and Eve, and passed on to their offspring. I don't know why God would have created this inherent in a "new" human, unrelated to Adam and Eve.

The other possibility is that God created an entirely new Garden of Eden, new Adam and Eve, etc., but this doesn't make a lot of sense, either. Presupposing free will, which is Biblical, the possibility would exist that the "new" humans would NOT sin, and a set of "perfect" humans would coexist with "fallen" humans. God would of course have known the final outcome, but he would also have created the "new" Adam and Eve with the ability to choose - ie, they would not have been created with an INABILITY to choose. God would have just known their choice in advance.

This does not seem to make a lot of sense, honestly.

	06-09-2003 22:51									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Ramo Most Islamic societies aren't theocratic. I find it interesting that the three largest Islamic countries have had women heads of state (Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh), while the same can't be said of the three largest Christian countries.

Zing...

	06-09-2003 22:52									#38
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Presumably one of his son's wives would have to be...but they hardly could account for ALL the different races that have arisen since the supposed Flood (which, according to Biblical chronology, would had to have been c. 2350 BCE). I think the Tower of Babel, which was post-Noah, is the only hope of a Biblical explanation for the sheer number of different races.

Ah, sorry, I posted before seeing this.

	06-09-2003 22:52									#39
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: I don't think it's an either/or question. I happen to believe there are some things in the bible that are true, and others that are not.

Then what source "above" the Bible differentiates the two? If part of the Bible is false, you can't use any part of the Bible to justify any other part of it.

	06-09-2003 22:54									#40
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd I suppose that's a possibility, although it brings up an interesting question. Were these humans created with a sin nature, and with original sin? Remember, these things were a result of the sin of Adam and Eve, and passed on to their offspring. I don't know why God would have created this inherent in a "new" human, unrelated to Adam and Eve. The other possibility is that God created an entirely new Garden of Eden, new Adam and Eve, etc., but this doesn't make a lot of sense, either. Presupposing free will, which is Biblical, the possibility would exist that the "new" humans would NOT sin, and a set of "perfect" humans would coexist with "fallen" humans. God would of course have known the final outcome, but he would also have created the "new" Adam and Eve with the ability to choose - ie, they would not have been created with an INABILITY to choose. God would have just known their choice in advance. This does not seem to make a lot of sense, honestly.

The whole idea of original sin makes no sense. It's incompatable with the idea of a just and loving God.

	06-09-2003 22:55									#41
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Most often, The Qur'an talks definitely only to men, whereas women are not addressed directly. He talks about, but not to women.
That's especially bad in the case of seperation, where Qur'an only talks about how men seperate from women, but not the other way around. (2, 226ff)
2, 228 clearly states that men stand above women.
Sure, the Qur'an also says positive things about women (or their character, but definitely they aren't treated in the scripture as being equal to men.

	06-09-2003 22:56									#42
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Then what source "above" the Bible differentiates the two? If part of the Bible is false, you can't use any part of the Bible to justify any other part of it.

I think truth can be discerned without necessarily having other sources. For example, the idea that Jesus was required as a blood sacrifice to convince a supposedly just and loving God to forgive his earthly children seems obviously false to me.

	06-09-2003 22:57									#43
	Suffering from ads?

Well, considering last time I heard Ms. Bhutto is living in exile, and can be charged with treason if she returns to Pakistan, I hardly think that she's the best example to give Ramo.

	06-09-2003 22:57									#44
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd I suppose that's a possibility, although it brings up an interesting question. Were these humans created with a sin nature, and with original sin? Remember, these things were a result of the sin of Adam and Eve, and passed on to their offspring. I don't know why God would have created this inherent in a "new" human, unrelated to Adam and Eve.

This goes into a whole theological thing of the importance of Original Sin and such...but that's not really relevant if one takes the Biblical Flood account literally, because it implies all those other humans were wiped out, and what we have left are only those descendant from A&E and thus have Original Sin.

	06-09-2003 23:00									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Well, considering last time I heard Ms. Bhutto is living in exile, and can be charged with treason if she returns to Pakistan, I hardly think that she's the best example to give Ramo.

Because she was the head of one of the two major opposition parties (the same happened with the head of the other opposition party, a man) to Musharraf's dictatorship. Not because she was a woman.

	06-09-2003 23:04									#46
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I think less Islam would be a key factor in ending racism, or at least in our part of the world. It would be easier to accept a lot of the people living out here if they didn't surpress women, condemned gays or got special treatment because of their religion and cultural background.

	06-09-2003 23:07									#47
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Caligastia The whole idea of original sin makes no sense. It's incompatable with the idea of a just and loving God.

While I agree with the sentiment, it begs the question: If you don't believe in Original Sin, doesn't that pretty much negate the purpose of Jesus being divine and martyred? It seems to me that if one wants to take it as true that Jesus was the Son of God, it would be very difficult to eliminate his part in Original Sin except by an arbitrary dismissal of it.

If you don't believe Jesus was divine, though, then it can make sense.

	06-09-2003 23:09									#48
	Tired of ads?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again...there are few things I'd rather be less than a homosexual in an Islamic country. The cultural attitudes are so monstrous as to make life for such men and women hell. Maybe this will change in the future like it did for (most) Western cultures, but for right now, it's categorically atrocious.

	06-09-2003 23:12									#49
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov While I agree with the sentiment, it begs the question: If you don't believe in Original Sin, doesn't that pretty much negate the purpose of Jesus being divine and martyred? It seems to me that if one wants to take it as true that Jesus was the Son of God, it would be very difficult to eliminate his part in Original Sin except by an arbitrary dismissal of it. If you don't believe Jesus was divine, though, then it can make sense.

I believe Jesus was divine (though not the only son of God in the biblical sense) but that his purose in coming to earth was to reveal God's love. His being put to death was just an unfortunate occurance.

	06-09-2003 23:20									#50
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Less Islam might help Monk, but you could also argue that if everyone became a Muslim, then there wouldn't be any racism in the first place!

I have friends from Malaysia in university. They're basically treated like 2nd class citizens in Malaysia because they are not Muslim. Most of the Malaysian Muslims studying in Ireland are being paid for by their government; non-Muslims for the most part have to pay their own way. And yet they have to come to study here, because some of the higher learning institutes in Malaysia are 'Muslim only' and there are not enough places.

The only reason I'm coming down on Islam so hard with regard to racism is that the orginal post by Rina suggested that Islam is the solution to racism. I'm discrediting this. Racism is practically universal in most cultures; people are naturally afraid of those that are different. The solution to racism is to acknowledge our commmon humanity and be tolerant towards each other.

	06-09-2003 23:22									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: I've said it before, and I'll say it again...there are few things I'd rather be less than a homosexual in an Islamic country. The cultural attitudes are so monstrous as to make life for such men and women hell. Maybe this will change in the future like it did for (most) Western cultures, but for right now, it's categorically atrocious.

Agreed. Gays are pretty much universally persecuted in the Islamic world.

	06-09-2003 23:26									#52
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by our_man The solution to racism is to acknowledge our commmon humanity and be tolerant towards each other.

I think 'tolerance' is an overrated buzzword. Shouldn't our ultimate goal be to learn to love one another as brothers and sisters? Mere tolerance...pffft

	06-09-2003 23:27									#53
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: This goes into a whole theological thing of the importance of Original Sin and such...but that's not really relevant if one takes the Biblical Flood account literally, because it implies all those other humans were wiped out, and what we have left are only those descendant from A&E and thus have Original Sin.

Sorry, this won't work either. If the humans without Original Sin made the choice not to sin, then God wouldn't have destroyed them in a flood, because the reason for the Flood was to punish everyone who had repeatedly turned to wickedness.

Put another way, why would God save 7 humans who were by definition sinful on some level, while wiping out millions of humans who were not at all sinful? And since the purpose of the Flood was to punish wickedness, this makes no sense at all.

Cali,

quote: I think truth can be discerned without necessarily having other sources. For example, the idea that Jesus was required as a blood sacrifice to convince a supposedly just and loving God to forgive his earthly children seems obviously false to me.

Actually what you are saying is that it seems just and unloving, not "obviously false". It's "obviously false" according to YOUR sense of just and unjust, stipulating that God is just. That stipulation, though, requires a further stipulation that any part of the Bible stating that God is a just God is true. But then on what basis do you believe this? Faith? Oh, and do you also believe that the Bible is the true and inspired Word of God?

	06-09-2003 23:29									#54
	Remove this text

quote: I believe Jesus was divine (though not the only son of God in the biblical sense) but that his purose in coming to earth was to reveal God's love. His being put to death was just an unfortunate occurance.

If Jesus was divine, and if his death was simply an "unfortunate occurance", then why didn't Jesus or God act to stop the Crucifixion?

	06-09-2003 23:31									#55
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Actually what you are saying is that it seems just and unloving, not "obviously false". It's "obviously false" according to YOUR sense of just and unjust, stipulating that God is just. That stipulation, though, requires a further stipulation that any part of the Bible stating that God is a just God is true. But then on what basis do you believe this? Faith? Oh, and do you also believe that the Bible is the true and inspired Word of God?

No, I believe that parts of the Bible are inspired by God, but that much has been influenced by human beliefs.

As for why I believe God is just...need I mention the Urantia Book again?

	06-09-2003 23:34									#56
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Sorry, this won't work either. If the humans without Original Sin made the choice not to sin, then God wouldn't have destroyed them in a flood, because the reason for the Flood was to punish everyone who had repeatedly turned to wickedness. Put another way, why would God save 7 humans who were by definition sinful on some level, while wiping out millions of humans who were not at all sinful? And since the purpose of the Flood was to punish wickedness, this makes no sense at all.

"Original Sin" refers to the sin of A&E. Why would the absense of that particular sin render all other humans created incapable of wickedness? Perhaps after the Fall, God made the other people to be like "ordinary humans," with the ability to be wicked, just for the very purpose of creating a diverse gene pool and suitable mates for the descendants of A&E?

My, my...making hypothetical Biblical situations can be fun!

	06-09-2003 23:34									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Odin Kill all the KKKers and nazis.

Since you got to it before I saw it, that'll only cost you three days instead of a week.

	06-09-2003 23:34									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Caligastia, tolerance works pretty well for me, and believe me, even I can find this too demanding at times. To love everyone as brothers and sisters... I ain't no saint.

	06-09-2003 23:39									#59
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd If Jesus was divine, and if his death was simply an "unfortunate occurance", then why didn't Jesus or God act to stop the Crucifixion?

Jesus' work here on earth was done, and it was decided by him not to interfere in the natural conclusion to his human experience.

	06-09-2003 23:42									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by our_man Caligastia, tolerance works pretty well for me, and believe me, even I can find this too demanding at times. To love everyone as brothers and sisters... I ain't no saint.

Ever heard the saying about shooting for the moon? If your aim is love your brothers and sisters on this planet, then you should at least be able to tolerate them. If you only aim to tolerate, what happens when you fail in that?