All Comments (198)

May I suggest the work of David Barton. His book, "Original Intent" is an excellent reference for every American including Lawyers, Judges and Politicians. Also, his booklet, "Separation of Church & State- What the Founders Meant" is a short essay regarding this subject. Again, I encourage every American to read it.

Thank you for your time and concideration.

Mike Dillard

Son of Adam,

how does proving how things work prove "god's awesome power?" Besides, there are a lot of people out there who don't know and don't care how certain things work and still don't believe in god, so what's your point? Lastly, why does god have to be big for you to worship? Who says just because something is small that it is easy to understand? look at the atom and how long it took us to realize it's existence and it's properties?

Why do people think that all because they know how things work is a basis for saying that there is no God? All you do is prove God's awesome power. Why do you ask questions about God's motives because if God was small enough for me to understand he wouldn't be big enough for me to worship.

So nothing of import existed until man came along. Wow, I'll have to tell that to the Sun and Moon and stars. supernovas neutron stars, planets comets. Since I've been visiting this blog, post or otherwise discussion, I see how conceited man is for his/her god. The voyager space craft turned its camera back to earth and took a picture of it. This picture you can find by googling "pale blue dot", was protested by many religious groups who didn't want earth people to see just how small we really are.

Carl Sagan said the following quotation on May 11, 1996 about what he felt the photo demonstrated:[3]

We succeeded in taking that picture [from deep space], and if you look at it, you see a dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there — on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors, so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light.

Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand. It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.

I'm sorry garyd, but it still sounds so deceitful and not out of love. It's all so petty and egotistical. Besides, if the universe is so much the puzzle and mystery that God meant it to be,(albeit through intimidation and petty jealousy on his part, not to mention all the smiting) then likewise, in reverse it could be said that the earth is just as old as scientists and archeologists say it is, and through evolution, has gotten us this far.

Personally, i don't think that science and religion preclude each other. I think that people just have a hard time being themselves and they have alot of fear, fear of death, fear of rejection,fear of love and trust, and in our attempt to reconcile ourselves to that fear, we create tensions and differentiations where they don't really exist. This having to concentrate on someone else being responsible for existence or lack thereof draws us away from having to admit our fears, that there may be nothing left after this. What they fail to realize is that death with nothing to follow does not render our lives meaningless, it is just the revolution of a circle.your essence, your energy (re)evolving into the next cycle of energy. Their is most certainly a beginning to all of this chaotic sensible lovely mess we call life, I just don't believe in it in the same form as you do (i.e. the trinity).

The first assumption of science is that our sense are efficient and reliable enough to discern everything. I do not believe this to be the case.

The universe appears to our senses to be 15 billion years old. Does that of necessity mean that it is? Of course not.

Any God powerful enough to have made this universe in the first place could also obviously have started it at any point in its history he chose. Why would he do so? Two reasons.

1.Salvation was to be by grace and grace alone hence any thing that would lead directly to God's proveable existence within the creation would have to be removed. What better way to do that than to populate it with obvious straws for unbelief to fasten upon?

2.In God's eyes until the coming of sentient man upon the scene to whom He might reveal his justice love and mercy nothing else of import existed.

2.

FR.Anderson Have you ever actually read the 1st admendment? Hugo black clearly rewrote it to suit his own notions.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Religion, or prohibiting the free exercise there of.

Apprently Hugo Black decided what congress could do the court in its infinite wisdon would and in spades, not to mention hearts diamonds clubs and both jokers one of whom appears to have been Mr. Black.

What the admendment actually means is that Congress can't tell you when where or how to build your house of worship nor dictate to you how you practice your religion.

Hugo Black decided to reinterpret these words to mean than only the atheist perspective on religion could be admitted into the clear light of day.

I've been checking back for his response also and likewise, hope he and his family are alright. If anyone spots him, let me know.

So do I E FAV but I think he gave it up. I would like to get into a discussion of Genesis because it just doesn't seem to follow to logic. Remember if we were made in god's image than it stands to reason our logic should be the same.

I'm glad to see it's still alive too - I check back everday for the post-birthday response that CB said he would make.

Hope he's OK.

Good Morning all,
Glad to see this stream is still active.. Have any of you out there read I CHING, I got into it about 15 years ago and have found it to be very powerful. It answers problems with thought. It makes one think when addressing a problem. The bible on the other hand is interpreted anyway the individual decides it benefits them. There are so many retreats for bible thinkers that nothing really makes any sense. I listen to TV preachers and the way they interpret a bible passage usually has something to do with give until it hurts.

Jacob - it's important to me what you think and say -- and I'm sure it is even more important to people in your "real" life.

I also bet that you try to think of solutions to your problems more than you give yourself credit for. Problem solving is a skill taught in school and by parents. Some problems have to be solved on the spot, without time to consult a bible or any other source but yourself.

Thanks for your explanation of the scripture. I have to admit I still don't get it, but that's OK - no need to explain further - I appreciate the effort.

Well it's not important what I think, what I have to say, beacause I'm a evil person and fall short of perfection. When I have a problem I don't try to think of a solution. It's so much easier to read scripture because in the Bible you can find an answer to just about any life problem.

As to the scripture. I person as me "Why would God create such a universe that need constant tending?" This scripture explains it. God doesn't think like we think. And to try to explain his actions using human motives would be impossible for man.

Hi, Jacob banks -

You're right, I am here to learn - mainly about how others think.

To be honest, when a Christian quotes scripture instead of making a direct response, it seems like a cop out.

If you think that's not a correct analysis, I'd like to hear how you see it - but keep in mind, I'd prefer that you not quote more scripture.

I'd also like to know what you meant by the line for Isaiah that you quoted.

E Favorite

You make me smile. Your desire to learn is what keeps me here. I'm but a fool for trying to answer your question and asking my own. God will reveal the answer to you if he sees fit. So from now on I will no longer give the words from my mouth. I will give you some scripture so you and I can meditate on it.

"You turn things upside down, as if the potter were thought to be like the clay." Isaiah 29:16

Yes Lily, I've read that article already. I can't ignore scientific finding like this. Yes they do discover new things and change thier minds in light of new evidence but that is what science is all about. They break it and see if they can put back together again. If it goes back exactly the same way, there is something to it. Simple.

Thx Lily, I have msnbc as one of my pages. I have read a great amount of material on our evolutionary history and have an idea of what went on. We were the hunted at one time and had to gather in force for protection. I'll check it out..

Jwest, i started reading an article from newsweek yesterday about the advances in scientific research on "what or who" encouraged us to "get up off our backsides and start looking for other sources of food."

Perhaps you wanna take a look?http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17542627/site/newsweek/page/1

So the whole thing is, the story just won't work out unless Adam and Eve defy God. They were suppose to. Otherwise what's the point. People that shun evolution for creation are just simply blind to facts. The old adage don't confuse me with facts comes onto play. Creation according to what CB stated in his explanation, has us going from a superior life form to an inferior life form. Evolution has us going from a inferior life form to a superior life form. If you want to call waging wars and fast food superior life forms. Evolution and creation do seem to have a common denominator, we were once just laying around in the trees until something encouraged us to get up off our backsides and start looking for other sources of food. The argument now is what or who did the encouraging.

Thanks Jwest and Lily, for going through all the contradictions. I couldn't bear it.

Meanwhile, there’s a common theme I hear when some Christians defend their faith, and that is a spiritual experience in which God or Jesus makes a profound life-changing statement to them. Then suddenly, somehow, everything in the Bible makes sense and all church dogma (depending on what church you're in) is true. Amazing.

I’ve had sudden, life-changing insights too. They’ve provided clarity and direction for my life, but did not cause me to discard reason to completely and unconditionally accept an existing religious dogma and belief system.

Laying around naked and ignorant surrounded by tame "wild" animals IS man's idea of heaven I think.

Isn't that the idea?, kinda like the classic "American Dream." Not realistic and a little boring, but that's why it's a dream. Our man made idea of heaven doesn't sound like something God would want for us, but our idea of the American Dream isn't what all immigrants or Americans necessarily want either.

Lily,
I agree with you. I'm sorry if my last post was a bit to harsh, but if Adam and Eve never ate from the tree of knowledge, and never knew they were naked, then today we would all be still laying around the garden, naked and ignorant. What I'm trying to say is it is way too confusing. Why would God want us to be just laying around. If any of you really think about that senerio then how would that be any differnet then how animals in the jungles live today.

OK, so nobody wants to touch the above, that's ok, for my own purposes, I must continue. I had to start at the beginning because the contradictions and unexplainable loose ends started there, so moving forward and getting to CB's explanation of Cain and Abel's wives, (of which there is no mention anywhere that either of them had wive's before Cain slew Abel, let alone Abel having one ever, at all).

CB, you stated above, People "do not understand the clear historical record God has given to us. Also, many people try and argue for the fallibility of the Bible from this very same position. People try to interpret Genesis from our present situation, rather than understand the true biblical history of the world and the changes that have occurred because of sin. Because they are not building their world view on Scripture, but taking a secular way of thinking to the Bible, they are blinded to the simple answers. Genesis is the record of the God who was there as history happened. It is the word of One who knows everything, and who is a reliable witness from the past. Thus, when we use Genesis as a basis for understanding history, we can make sense of questions that would otherwise be a mystery."

CB, your explanation IS vague, as I thought it would be, and doesn't hold water for anyone who has the ability to think about and make sense of what they read. The answers are simple and there is no mystery. I am not interpreting the Bible from my present situation, I am interpreting it from what it clearly states, no matter what version you read.

Genesis 4:10- God curses Cain to wandering the earth for killing his brother.
4:14- Cain expresses his fear that whoever should find him, will kill him.

My brain is screaming out questions. CB, you say we're all descendants of Adam. Ok, it doesn't dismiss incest and it's neccessity to procreate the inhabitants of earth, but I have to assume that there were inhabitants previous to ADam and Eve based on the facts as the Bible relates them. The Bible clearly states that Adam and Eve had two sons, it clearly omits any mention of any daughters, EVER, yet we are to assume that Adam and Eve had all these kids that grew up, moved away and forgot who there siblings were? meaning, why would Cain fear anyone killing him, since those anyones are his brothers and sisters? Then, after he's lived in Nod for awhile, he has a child with his wife and then follows four more generations of Cain's children. AND then... Eve bears Seth!!!!Nah, somethings not right here. Obviously, the Bible's historical account is not so clear. Adam didn't eat from the Tree of Life, only the Tree of Knowledge and yet God let him & hundreds of generations after him, live for humdreds of years?????? There are just too many holes to fill in and I suppose if you really want to believe in something, you will find a way to fill those holes with explanations that support that belief, no matter how far-fetched or weak they sound. I seriously doubt God gave us the ability to use logic, just so we could ignore it. You gotta gimme something else.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful. These types of questions and wonderings have always prompted me to look deeper into what I believe and why. Saying the Bible is so clear and inerrant half the time and then saying certain things are just God's mysteries that we may never understand is just too... well convenient. (and... * said with much sarcasm,*.. not contradictory at all.)

PS- Happy Birthday, hope you don't read this until tomorrow.

Morning All,

It seems to me that Adam and Eve were able to live pretty much how animals live today. Off the fruits of the land, have sex with whoever they wanted to have sex with, lay around when not looking for sex and food. Boy Eve did us a disservice. If you believe in an omnipotent God, then that omnipotent God does everything for you. God create the serpent as Lily stated. God created everything, so God created the first sin. You just can't have it both ways. Believers have come to zig and zag whenever faced with facts they themselves can't explain. Is God omnipotent or not. If he is, we as humans are controlled like puppets by him. Then whats the point. Why would a God so powerful want to control every aspect of human life on this planet. Start vicious wars, disease, starvation, and all the other ills of this world. OH yeah, we have free will. Then we go back to omnipotence. As soon as man and woman take responsibility for their own actions we will be a better planet. More later.

Okay, i have to go off on tangent here. CB, i didn't get a chance to look at anything this morning or even read what's been written since i last wrote, but i've been reading and so many questions come to mind with this thread and so many others like this.

First off, Adam and Eve are created, with Eve being Adam's companion (that's the least condescending term used in any of my Bibles to explain Eve's existence, there is also helper & help meet), right?
Adam is the one that labels/calls her "woman", meaning of the womb of man, right? (kinda of ironic since men don't have a womb and can't give birth..to anything.)

*Side note- it is my belief and understanding based on anthropological studies, that before we were a patriarchal(sp)(i.e. man/father honoring) society, we were a matriarchal society.

Anyway, I diverge.

So, they're naked and not ashamed, (like babies not knowing anything from anything) and then enters the Serpent, AKA the Devil.

The serpent., mind you,.. that God made.(so basically, good created evil to oppose itself and ...?why?). I'll leave that to anyone else to answer.

So Eve takes of the "fore-bidden" fruit of knowledge and also encourages Adam to do so..., and then God knows that they did it because they let on to him that NOW they know they're naked and NOW they're ashamed of it?( they're not much like a babies at this point, but I want to know how this type of sinful conscientiousness is obtained by this knowledge?)
God created them naked, there is no one else to acknowledge any difference in them for being so, but all of a sudden, THEY notice they're naked and automatically,... arbitrarily,... they somehow realize, with no other facts to base their opinion on,.. that being naked is wrong?

If your understanding my line of questioning here, then please understand that I'm not trying to tear asunder what your God created, (but if he's yours then he's mine too, and everyone elses for that matter,) but these are the questions that my discerning mind wants to know.
So, where was I, oh yes, they eat the apple, and God tells Eve for her sin "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing: with pain you will give birth to children."
he also states that she will desire her husband and her husband shall rule over her.

Then he tells Adam, "cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."

Ok, so i understand that in the Bible, God is punishing Eve (all women) for sinning and influencing her "husband" to follow suit, but then why are we[women] punished with a painful, but bearable, and ultimately, eternal ability to produce (meaning, bring forth, i.e. birth) life and. . men were punished with toiling and harvesting the earth? ( to me, meaning, to exploit, control, dominate and ultimately bring about death, although, I MAY be biased).
But of course, this is only my interpretation of the Bible. (which according to you, CB is wrong because there are "hard and fast rules" to interpretating this particular bit of literature.)

So, they sin, and God casts them out, saying, "Behold, the man is become as one of US, to know good and evil: he must not be able to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
Hey,. wait,... it's OT... At this point, man only thinks of God as the(1) one, the Only, the Omega, the Omniscient, Omnipresent and Omnipotent One. He doesn't become the trinity until after Christ comes. At this point, Jesus hasn't even been predicted.... Explain the us?

CB- Happy birthday. thanks going to so much trouble to explain. I still don't understand and don't expect to and don't really need to.

It seems to me that if there was a God who wanted us to understand him and what he wanted from us, he would have made it a lot easier to do so.

RELIGION IS ALREADY IN THE SCHOOLS wrote a number of logical fallacies that represent nothing more than a fundamental misunderstanding of science, in asterisks:

*Since both naturalism and humanism exclude God from science or any other active function in the creation or maintenance of life and the universe in general, it is very obvious that their position is nothing but atheism. And atheism, no less than theism, is a religion!*

Science excludes supernatural causes. It's not a matter of excluding your god or anyone else's, it's a matter of considering only cause and effect relationships that can be tested. Because that is the realm of science, you are welcome to think of that constraint as its limitation, if you insist on believing on your particular fairy tale. But it's certainly not a declaration of atheism.

*Even doctrinaire-atheistic evolutionist Richard Dawkins admits that atheism cannot be proven to be true."--"Of course we can't prove that there isn't a God"(Dawkins, Richard).*

The misunderstanding continues. The goal of science is not to "prove" anything true, much less the existence or non-existence of a god, because ultimately nothing can be proven with absolute certainty. (Certainly the religious among us should agree that only an all-seeing, all-knowing being could prove something with absolute certainty.) The idea is to reject poorer explanations in favor of better ones, with a statistical probability assigned to the decision to favor the new explanation. This probability is based on the scientific method. You have set up a straw man only to knock it down--well done.

*Therefore, they must believe it, and that makes it a religion.*

I'm not sure what logical planet you live on. Perhaps only one where the nature of science is not understood well.

*The atheistic nature of evolution is not only admitted, but insisted upon, by most of the leaders of evolutionary thought. Ernst Mayr, for example, says that:
"Darwinism rejects all supernatural phenomena and causations" (Mayr, Ernst, "Darwin's Influence on Modern Thought," Scientific American; vol. 283, July 2000, p. 83).*

The misunderstanding continues. Science cannot deal with supernatural phenomena because it has no way to test such cause and effect relationships. So, in order for science as a method to proceed, it must assume that material effects have material causes. Otherwise there is no way to construct such tests.

*A professor in the Department of Biology at Kansas State University says:
"Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such a hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic" (Todd, Scott C)*

I might agree with you on this one--the statement is non-sensical. It's not possible for scientific data to be collected and point to something supernatural.

*It is well known in the scientific world today that such influential evolutionists as Stephen Jay Gould and Edward Wilson of Harvard, Richard Dawkins of England, William Provine of Cornell, and numerous other evolutionary spokesmen are dogmatic atheists.*

It is also known that many evolutionary biologists and other scientists are not. They understand that science is guided by the goal of understanding the material realm and cannot know about supernatural causes. Unfortunately for your argument, evolution is a material process, and a well-accepted one, so science is an appropriate method to use for learning about the mechanisms responsible for it.

*Eminent scientific philosopher and ardent Darwinian atheist Michael Ruse has even acknowledged that evolution is their religion!
"Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. . . . Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today" (Ruse, Michael, "Saving Darwinism from the Darwinians," National Post: May 13, 2000, p. B-3).*

Boy, have you found the smoking gun or what? I'm sure he means it in exactly the narrow and perjorative way you do.

Why do anti-rationalists think they sound sensible when trying to strike down our understanding of the modern world in order promote their own particular fairy tale?

Jwest,

This will also be my last post since I do have to go to bed; it's after midnight here. Jwest, and I also say this with respect; you do not have enough Bible knowledge to make the claims you are making above. The world was perfect as God's creation and sin did not enter from day 1. It entered with Adam and Eve AFTER they allowed the serpent to mislead them. The original sin was Adam's, not Cain's!

Your words about God punishing man from day 1 are wrong, and, your words where you say God instilled sin in man are so totally wrong they are out of the stratosphere my friend. God is not the originator of sin, never ever!

I believe in science, I truly do. But, all science points to a creation, not an evolution. In fact, not long ago a number of the most prominent scientists in the world all rejected Darwin's theory of evolution and endorsed "intelligent design and creation." Note: I use the terms interchangeably since they mean the same thing, to my mind at least; feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I could even send you that article if you so wish. The winds of change are sweeping over the face of the eath my friend; to say all of this evolved and that we were apes or amoebas and that we EVOLVED to what we are today, is total lunacy!

You also say that none of what I quoted above is backed up with anything in the Bible; do you actually read the Bible? That's an honest question. I've said it before, and I'll say it again; the Bible also needs interpretation. Just as you have scientific equations, all the parts of the equation stand for something (my physics/chemistry knowledge is limited at BEST) just so can some parts of the Bible be interpeted literally, and some interpreted for their deeper meaning. We all know what the "equals", "plus", "minus" and "tims" signs are and mean; not all of us know what Phi stands for until we interpret it and are told that it is 3.1414. (Geez, I REALLY hope I'm correct with that; I just hope you get what I'm trying to say??!!).

I'm sure you're a gifted engineer Jwest, but, in this case, you're just plain wrong!

And, yes, in response to your last posting; everything I did was a choice. My family never put pressure on me to serve the Lord. They led by example. I chose to rebel, even though, as you said, I didn't have to. But, it was a route I needed to go through for myself I suppose. My faith isn't a crux although God helps those who cannot help themsleves too; no, my faith is an open minded choice to serve the Almighty with my whole heart, mind, soul and strength.

Your statement on handling the pressures of life head on, chin up, makes me smile. It is the typical response of someone in/from the armed forces and that is what makes you so resilient. I admire you for that and I take my hat off to you. It is a "black or white" approach to life I find in my family members in the police services; unfortunately, life does have it's hues of grey, although there are specific, clear, unambiguous, albeit often unpopular answers to every one of the hues of grey as well as the balck and white colours on the opposite ends of the spectrum. I acknowledge the hues of grey and I respond with specific answers i.e.: Christ, and the Bible. I'm a broken record, I know!!! :-)

Life can be a @#$&* and you'd know better than most. Trust me though, although we all walk different paths it doesn't make any of us less strong or resilient that the rest, it makes us different, and that is why this forum is so great. It really inspires me to speak to you all, even IF we don't agree!

Wow CB, Where do I start with this one. I too have know preachers kids that "went bad". And some that got further and further into God so much so that this world was a horrible place for them to live. They are some of the most unhappiest people I have ever met. Most born agains will tell you stories of distructive behavior and finaly some sort of break down. And in looking for relief just give it all to the lord. Wow enough of that burden I'll just give it to the lord. Whereas I'm glad you are well and happy, you never really needed to rebel in the first place. You lived such as strict life you probably just wanted to blow off some pent up stream. And did. You could have possibly felt the pressure your family was exerting on you and gave it up. Well I say good for you. I've never been that far down so I don't know. I've handled all the pressures of life head on. Chin up. I haven't had a choice. If I went down, there was nobody to pull me up. I have to run for now but I'll be back..

All,
Nothing in the afore mentioned explanation by our friend CB is backed up by anything in the Bible. I've read so many different explanations and while this one is well thought out it won't hold a candle to proving anything. Ergo blind faith. I believe in my science so do each one of you out there including CB and Jacob. My science is electronics, and not meaning to sound pretentious, I know and trust everything this computer is doing from my typing to you reading this message. I currently work in an engineering department. All this said if I trust and know my science, I must trust all others that know and trust thiers. When scientists say the earth is 4 + billion years old I believe them. CB you say it is only 6 thousand years old. Please don't tell me God's days are different than ours I just say how do you know that. I trust evolution and think what a great planet we live on that can make life. Maybe, just maybe, this planet is God and it's time we start getting our heads out of the sand and start taking care of it. You ask, are millions of people wrong, say could be. Because they are handed a rope when they were very young and told to hold onto it with all their might or they will fall and burn in hell forever. God started punishing man from day one. Cain killed from one day one, sin happened on day one. All sins began on day one. Otherwise the story wouldn't be very compleling. It was so bad God sent Jesus to die for the sins God instilled in people from day one. There was and is now no happy ever after to this whole story. I want to hear what others are saying so I'll shut up for now.

E-Favorite,

Adam and Eve certainly had other children. Cain and Abel were the first, after Abel's death Seth followed, and many others.

The question has been raised over and over again as to who were Cain and Abel's wives and I answered it for those who raised it. I'm sorry you're confused. :-) It is not because I explained the Bible; it is, with respect, because you acknowledged you don't know the Bible. Some "mysteries" of the Bible need a deeper delving to be able to reveal the meanings and history behind them.

Jwest,

I also promised you that I'd tell you about the path I travelled. Have you ever heard the saying "doctor's kids are the sickest?" Well, pastor's kids are the naughtiest. I tried and did just about everything in the book to prove that it was my father who was the pastor and not me. I did just about everything with the exception of two things.

In fact, at a stage I started developing and pursuing a great interest in the occult and all things related. I was really intent on finding an alternative to God and all the things I was taught and things I saw as a child growing up. But, my parents stayed on their knees and continued praying for me and loving me unconditionally, all the while not allowing me to bring alcohol, cigarettes and other "herbs" as well as women into their house. They loved me, with boundaries and even in my worst state I respected that. I was never really suicidal (I've always had this incredible desire for abundant life) although on many occasions I could have lost my life with the things I was doing and the situations I got myself in to. Things such as housebreaking, "lending" cars, running from the police who were actively looking for us (that they never found out who I was is a miracle in itself), running from irate fathers, husbands and boyfriends, trying to not get killed by oncoming traffic while walking and driving under influence, trying not to get killed by rival gang memebers and hangers on and all the rest were par for the course for me. I never really like talking about these days, since, 1) they're in the past and 2) my life is a walk in the park compared to yours and others. You probably have such stories to tell my hair will stand on end; more than 20 years in the armed forces and you'll certainly have stories to tell. I never want to use my life as a base of all experience, since other's experiences are often worse than mine.

But, I know where I was going and know where I could have been now. And, I'm SO THANKFUL God kept me through it all. One night, at the lowest of the low that I was experiencing (note: I was totally sober!!!) a voice said to me "the more you run from me, the more I'll speak to you and the more you'll hear my voice; stop running and come back to me." I don't expect you or anyone to understand this, since once again God's ways are foolish to those who reject Him. It was not quite as strong as Moses' burning bush experience, but it was real enough for me to be positively shocked into action.

That day I decided to stop fighting, and I returned to the Lord. I've never looked back ever since and I thank the Lord for His mercies in my life. I've been married for five years, I have a BEAUTIFUL wife and 7 month daughter, I am successful in that I am living God's purpose for my life and I know that the Lord has a great future for me and my family. Am I perfect? Not by a LOOOONNNGG shot, but, I strive after a life of righteousness and holiness, and constantly submit to the Holy Spirit's leading and guiding in my life. It was also on that day I decided I was going to follow the route I am in equipping myself to "know what I know and know why I know it."

So, Jwest, I most certainly questioned God, the Bible, the Church and all authority, and yes, I certainly allowed for other influences in my life. All I can say is that Jesus Christ is the only way; I've tried others, they don't work. They can't, because they're devoid of any truth or life. Only Christ is the way, the truth and the life.

I'm no bible expert, but I thought Adam and Eve were the first people. They had two sons - no daughters. So I thought the question was about how Cain and Abel could marry if there were no other people around but them and their parents.

I don't recall anything a question being raised about incestuous relationships, which CB spent a lot of time on.

I'll leave the rest to those with more knowledge of the Bible than I have. I'm confused, but that is often the case when people try to explain the Bible.

Hello Jwest, E-favorite, Marco Polo, Lily and all others,

As promised I have provided an answer to you re: Cain’s wife (there’s no record that Abel had a wife) and the land of Nod. This issue is a common issue that skeptics throughout the ages have tried to use to discredit the Bible and more specifically the book of Genesis as being true historically.

The truth be told, a lot of Christians cannot answer these questions, but, that does not mean that there are no answers.

To be fair, and for the sake of proper record keeping, I have cut and pasted the largest majority of this explanation from the following link:

http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c004.html

There are massive amounts of resources to get information of this nature from and to save me having to type everything out from scratch out of my own head or from some of my "hard-copy" resources I have chosen to use this website. It is of great help and I think these individuals are really excellent in what they do. I can only hope to be as good as they are one day.

To kick this explanation off the following must be said: This might sound like semantics to you, but, we are all descendants of Adam and therefore we are all married to those who are “of the same blood” as us. There is no way around this fact, and, to become really specific about this, Cain’s wife was a descendant of Adam, as are we all.

But, the question remains; how close a relative of Cain was she? If we work solely and objectively from Scripture, without any personal prejudices or other extra-Biblical ideas, then back at the beginning, when there was only the first generation, brothers would have had to have married sisters or there would be no more generations! We are not told when Cain married or any of the details of other marriages and children, but we can say for certain that some brothers had to marry their sisters at the beginning of human history. The next question will most certainly be: what about God’s laws? Many people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage.

Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human! I’ve explained this by saying that we are all descendants of Adam. But, more specifically, the law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other. Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages.

Some may say that marriage of siblings today is outlawed, for obvious reasons. Yes, there are genetic deformities that exist and it is patently unwise to marry relations, but, Adam and Eve were created perfect, with no flaws. Remember, the Lord told them to be fruitful and to multiply. Adam and Eve did not have accumulated genetic mistakes. When the first two people were created, they were physically perfect. Everything God made was "very good" (Genesis 1:31), so their genes were perfect -- no mistakes! But, when sin entered the world (because of Adam -- Genesis 3:6, Romans 5:12), God cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate, that is, suffer death and decay (Romans 8:22). Over thousands of years, this degeneration has produced all sorts of genetic mistakes in living things.

Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He (as well as his brothers and sisters) would have have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam or Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with (it takes time for these copying errors to accumulate). In that situation, brother and sister could have married with God's approval, without any potential to produce deformed offspring.

By the time of Moses (a few thousand years later), degenerative mistakes would have built up in the human race to such an extent that it was necessary for God to forbid brother-sister (and close relative) marriage (Leviticus 18-20).[12] (Also, there were plenty of people on the earth by then, and there was no reason for close relations to marry.)

What about Cain the Land of Nod? Some claim that the passage in Genesis 4:16-17 means that Cain went to the land of Nod and found a wife. Thus, they can conclude there must have been another race of people on the earth, who were not descendants of Adam, who produced Cain's wife.

Genesis 4:16 & 17: And Cain 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: and he built a city, and he called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

From what has been stated previously, it is clear that all humans, Cain's wife included, are descendants of Adam. However, this passage does not say that Cain went to the land of Nod and found a wife. John Calvin, commenting on these verses, states:

From the context we may gather that Cain, before he slew his brother, had married a wife; otherwise Moses would now have related something respecting his marriage.[13]

Cain was married before he went to the land of Nod. He didn't find a wife there, but "knew" (had sexual relations with) his wife.[14]

Others have argued that because Cain built a "city" in the land of Nod, there must have been a lot of people there. However, the Hebrew word translated as "city" need not mean what we might imagine from the connotations of "city" today. The word meant a "walled town" or a protected encampment.[15] Even a hundred people would be plenty for such a "city." Nevertheless, there could have been many descendants of Adam on the earth by the time of Abel's death.

Many Christians cannot answer the question about Cain's wife because they focus on today's world (and the problems associated with close relations marrying), and do not understand the clear historical record God has given to us. Also, many people try and argue for the fallibility of the Bible from this very same position. People try to interpret Genesis from our present situation, rather than understand the true biblical history of the world and the changes that have occurred because of sin. Because they are not building their world view on Scripture, but taking a secular way of thinking to the Bible, they are blinded to the simple answers. Genesis is the record of the God who was there as history happened. It is the word of One who knows everything, and who is a reliable witness from the past. Thus, when we use Genesis as a basis for understanding history, we can make sense of questions that would otherwise be a mystery.

The above explanation is about the best online explanation I can find. As I stated above, I have included the link for you to follow and to perhaps find answers to your other questions you may have. I fully expect alot of replies and arguments to the above, based on what is said above, so, be my guest and fire away. Just to preclude any arguments you may have about me using other resources (someone in last week's argument said I was probably gone looking for the answers to the questions posed); I never use or quote resources I do not agree with 100%. There are other resources that are patently bogus or not 100% true. This website I totally endorse, not that they need my endorsement. So, I unashamedly quote them above.

In conclusion; tomorrow 14th March is my birthday. I'll not be online for the day but if you wouldn't mind posting your arguments, rebuttals, comments and all the rest I'll gladly deal with them 15 March when I return to the website. And please, I do not for one moment think everyone is clamouring to speak to me; me ego is not THAT inflated. I enjoy these arguments and counter arguments with each of the individuals mentioned above in the intro. You all keep me sharp and on my toes; for that, I am TRULY APPRECIATIVE!!! All the best and chat soon!

I absolutely agree with jwest and continue to look forward to CB's explanation of Cain and Abel, although i do have to say, that i already have a vague notion of how it will go and while trying to keep an open mind, will be quite interested to see if that notion is correct or not. ( i hope the vague notion doesn't turn out to be a vague explanation. )

E-Fav,
Maybe I'm using terminologies I've grown up with, and it's not fair for me to say CB is using them too. He did say in "His sovereign way" and I take that as the "Mysteries" Plus I watch a program on the weekends called mysteries of the Bible. The hosts explain these mysteries as mysteries. So I've got mysteries on the brain. I would like to hear CB's explanation of the Cain and Able and Nod and while we are at it the people of Enoch. Maybe I will learn something. I keep an open mind even if it does sound shut. CB I'm enjoying this dicussion with you, I mean you no harm.

Jwest - Interesting -- I did not perceive that CB's discussion of mysteries was meant as an explanation for Cain and Abel's wives and the people of Nod.

CB - I look forward to the explanation you promised for later today.

CB,
I quoted your answer word for word, cut and paste is a wonderful tool.. It boils down to that mystery thing. That is, after all, the standard answer for most unexplained things in the bible by most Christians. No offense intended it is my interpretation of your answer to my question. That is; no answer. Now Jacob is bring in other books that I think were rejected by the council that voted on the books of the bible in the first place. I would be interested in reading those as well. Mystery, it's all surrounded by mystery.

Hello all,

I have to attend to interviews tonight, but, upon my return I'll address the Cain & Abel questions as well as the Nod question. Jwest, my friend, please do not put words in my mouth about Cain & Abel etc. You do have an excellent point about me, my dad and my upbringing and I'll explain to you the path I embarked on, only to arrive back at where I started, serving the Lord Almighty.

I'll then answer E-Favourite's question by doing so... Marco Polo, well observed about not overtly being in the Bible, alhtough we can make inferences. I doubt that the explanations are in the Apocrypha or any other book...I may be wrong though...

E Fav, CB did answer the question. He said it is one of God's mysteries. And we are not to question God's mysteries. He said: "The Bible has passages that are difficult to explain; yes, the Lord acts in His sovereign way and He does not need to explain His actions to us. I can in fact explain where Cain and Abel's wives came from and I can explain the origin of the people of Nod. Can those reading take those explanations and allow them to be argued on the basis of what I bleieve and allow it to get to it's logical conclusion? I'm afraid that from what I've experienced here, very few can. And, will the individuals be able to accept the explanations? Some maybe, not all". You see it is the evasive answers that get to me. If it doesn't make any sense than it's Gods mysteries. The Bible is not infallible and it does counterdict itself on many occasions. My big question is why the big mystery? Why so much confusion. To some like Jacob and CB they blindly accept what they are told and that's that. To others more proof is necessary.

The story of Cain and Abel's wives are not in the Bible. I think they are in one of the books that was left out of the bible. It tells how Adam and Eve had daughters, and basically, incest is what happened. Interesting stuff. Maybe its in the Life of Adam and Eve.or the Book of Jubilees, or even Enoch. One of those I think.

CB - I read through you recent long post and di not see an explanation about Cain and Abel's wives and the people of Nod.

I'd appreciate it if you'd let me know if you are going to answer those questions or not.

Thanks

CB. Good Morning to you,
You say your father is a pastor and you work for him. My question to you is, have you ever been able to think any other way about your faith except what has been instilled in you since birth. That is the problem with religion, christianity et al. it doesn't come naturally. it is a taught subject. If you take a group of people and raise them on an island without any religious indoctrination would they, on their own, find christ. The answer is no. People are raised with the beliefs of their elders, Hindu, Hindi, Arabs, Muslim, Bhuddist, Bhuddism etc.CB, you and all christians say you are the only true way. That means you think billions of people are burning in hell for eternity because they were raised wrong??? Wow, that's too much for my imagination to bare.

CB,

Thanks for your reply. I must admit that I was kinda channeling you from the last time we met, sorry about that. I tried to resist being a little sh*t, but maybe it was a test for you, played through me from the Powers that be. I really appreciate the way you handled it though, and in the future I'll follow suit.
The other bad on my part was in mentioning Adam and Eve. In a previous thread someone else and myself asked you about how God explains away the incestuist(sp) relationship between Adam and Eve. Within this thread, the question was about the origin of Cain and Able's wives. Same thing really. I was gonna look it up this morning before work but I didn't have time.
Again, thank you for your response, I respect a lot of what you said, and I have nothing but faith that you and I will both walk away from these discussions with nothing but love and respect for eachother and our prospective beliefs.

That is just another point made that tells reasonable people that they just can't have a decent discussion with some people. You can have all the level headedness in the world, but when dealing with a person of strong and sometimes convoluded faith, it is generally impossible.

Realist, I would add that it was reprehensible for Jacob to use the term "evil men" for people who disagree with his religious beliefs.

Could it be that the reason why you want religious education kept out of schools is not because of a wish to encourage religious freedoms, but actually because you realise that academic religious studies will impede your own programme of indoctrination.

Religious education, in order to be fully reflective of America's multicultural society, will have to treat all religious positions including non-theistic and atheistic positions equally. I suspect that such lessons might lead to a similar agnostic feeling amongst the population as we currently find in the UK.

Still I could be wrong. The British government thought they could gain the casual European drinking culture by increasing opening hours. As it is, we now have the same binge drinking culture we've always had, only for longer. Perhaps religious education would be appropriated by Christian religious conservatives and become an extension of the existing indoctrination programmes. In which case, perhaps you are right to be concerned after all. Nevertheless, with a proper planned curriculum, too much bias would inevitably lead to a detrimentally lowered performance from pupils in any official religious education examinations.

JWEST,

Yes, RSA is about 7 hours ahead, and that's why I left to go to bed, at 02:00 our time mind you! :-)

Yes, you do make a good point for which I can only say that there are tremendous abuses in the church today that are wrong! They are plain and simply wrong. The so called "prosperity gospel" where preachers take your money and you sit without material provision while they drive nice cars and fly private jets is WRONG!! My blood boils seeing these individuals preach. What they say is so contrary to the true Word of God that it plain and simply STINKS!! And, it makes my job so much harder since people have seen this and often lump everyone into the same boat! I also find it frustrating when thousands of people listen to and believe these individuals without discerning what is being said in the Bible and rejecting their message outright. God blesses us, yes, but there is no hard and fast formula to receive material blessings, and, God's blessings are more than just material. It is spiritual, emotional, physical, peace, joy, with lovely family etc. So yes, it IS WRONG and you are right to point those out. However, what alot of individuals do is focus on what people do and not on what the Word of God says, and that is truly sad. They focus on what man does and not on what Christ did and does. That is sad. And yes, not enough people know their Bible and know "what they know, and why they know it." My prayer for you will be that the Lord becomes real to you, as it is for everyone.

Hiya Lily,

Once again, thank you! You do raise very valid points and allow me to address them. I'm afraid my attitude of last week was wrong. For that I did apologise and my apology was accepted. Do I expect you to immediately forget about it? No, I don't, but, that will not preclude me from softening the content of my message in fear of offending. As I said then, I'll adapt how I say things but not what I say. If what I say gives you the impression that I exclude others for believing what they believe and know to be the truth of their creator then that is unfortunate. Believe it or not, I hear what others say and can accept differences in beliefs even if I do not agree with them. If we all agreed then yes, things would be more harmonious, but, they will never be so. Is it not Christ Himself who says in Matthew 10:34 that He did not come to bring peace; family will rise up against family when some believe in Christ and others not. Christ's message will always bring conflicting views since the thought that there is only one way to God will always offend. The exclusion you might feel I am perpetrating may be as a result of my unwillingness to accept other views as truth, even though I most certainly do acknowledge other views. I can do both.

Lily, the only way to be saved is through Christ, there's no way around it and for me to say otherwise would be wrong. I have never condemned anyone to hell, for it is not me to do so. In fact, at no point did I even say that. These are your assertions from what you know of the Christian faith and the message of Christ. I didn't need to say it, even though I know it to be true. And yes, I say my message