It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
One of the most common misconceptions about God is the idea that God is perfect, and therefore he could never change. God is indeed perfect, but perfection does not mean something that stands still.
...
I know this explanation will seem like heresy to many religious people who have put God in a little box and who are not willing to allow God to change.
But, I would like to note that if ...or when.. god comes down to earth to show himself to you all ...and or... answer your questions... you wouldn't be comparing his answers to the bible would ya?
I am not saying, not to, but it does look a little dumb... even when your doing it to write this "human" off..... which, even though, it is completely understandable....
I just get a real ugly feeling hearing you all qoute from the bible like the firgging followers that you seem to be.
no offense.... but life is solid and concrete... besides trying to figure out some guys personality or what children he had millions of years ago. Figuring out life is pretty simple... It is unchanging but chock full of variables ...yet... very simple to know.
everything in the bible is worthless to any one but a child.... or someone who likes stories....
Originally posted by AshleyD
Er... I didn't spend too much time on the 'About Us' type pages but is this guy actually claiming to channel Jesus or is it just a 'humorous' gimmick that his readers know he is using?
If it is the former, then I have to say 'Jesus' is wrong on a few things. For one, 'Jesus' said the Bible states Adam and Eve only had sons. However, this is a common mistake. We are specifically told in Genesis Adam and Eve had sons and daughters. That's just one example- There were about three other errors I saw after spending only five minutes on the site.
Apparently 'Jesus' needs to read the Bible a bit more.
[edit on 3/12/2008 by AshleyD]
Originally posted by Anciel
Where did 'Jesus' say the Bible states Adam and Eve had only sons total? If you're referring to this incest question, I think he was merely pointing out the physically impossibility in the Bible for Cain and Seth to have wives when only males were born at the time. The Bible says after Seth was born Adam lived another 800 years and then had sons and daughters.
Genesis, Chapter 4 makes it clear that Adam and Even had three children, and they were all boys. So if Adam and Eve truly were the first humans and the only humans in the Garden, how could their three sons have begotten children?
Logically, there is no way Adam and Eve could be the parents of humanity if they had only sons and if there were no other people on the planet.
And can you please state the other errors you found? thanx.
Originally posted by AshleyD
Then the author continues on to the modern genetic problem of siblings having children but completely misses out on the other sections on the Genesis account that the human race didn't fully begin to degenerate at high speed until after the flood, as shown in the rapidly decreasing lifespans. That is when our genetic material really started to deteriorate in the Bible- not at the high rate with Adam.
So, that's two fumbles right there in just one article. The author is trying to mesh antediluvian and postdiluvian genetics as alluded to in the Bible. Now, there could very well have been other people alive on the earth or preceding Adam. I don't believe it but it is possible. However, using the arguments the author uses, his case fails miserably because he is not aware of what else the Bible says. And is Jesus really going to be unaware of what the Bible says? Of course not.
"In this case, the fact is that Adam and Eve were not the only people on Earth and they were not the only souls to fall from the Garden of Eden. The story of Adam and Eve is not the ultimate beginning of human life on Earth. Adam and Eve should be seen as archetypes, and their story simply tells the story of an entire evolution of souls. These souls first descended into a spiritual school, illustrated as the Garden of Eden. The God in the garden was a spiritual teacher by the name Lord Maitreya. The garden existed in a realm of higher vibrations that is not visible to the physical senses of human beings...
"As I said, there were a number of souls who fell at the same time. Yet there were already millions of human beings living in the material frequency spectrum. It was with these people that the sons of Adam and Eve married and had children. Because these people had already descended far below the level of the Christ consciousness, this intermarrying actually hastened the descent in consciousness of the people who fell from the garden. It sped up the process that caused them to forget their spiritual origin.
So the short answer is that there was no incest involved, and the reason was that there were many souls who fell and they fell into a frequency spectrum that was already inhabited by people by people with whom they could intermarry. Obviously, this answer would not be acceptable to orthodox Christians or materialistic scientists. Yet it is a fact.
Originally posted by Anciel
No I think you're missing the point. The question was about incest in the Garden of Eden, because it's physically impossible for Cain and Seth to have had wives if they were the only people in the garden of eden, and especially since Adam and Eve didn't start having daughters until sometime after Seth was born. Therefore, if you're a bible follower, Where did Cain's wife come from??? THAT was the point of the article...
Not really, the whole point of the flood was to wipe out the genetic mess the 'Sons of God' had made when they started mating with the daughters of man, (Gen 6:2) but I digress :p
Anyway, you're going all over the map and missing the entire point of this one article.
Originally posted by AshleyD
No, I understand that perfectly. But they had daughters whereas the article states they only had three sons. Since Abel was murdered, that leaves two. Obviously two men, Seth and Cain, could not populate the earth. But we are told there were females, too. Not just Seth and Cain.
So where did Cain get his wife? All we're told is that he had a wife and had children with her. We're never told specifically she came from anywhere else. We're never specifically told she was not of any relation. She was just there.
Again, the topic of discussion is not whether or not there were necessarily other people (this has been debated for centuries) but the unbiblical argument the author is using to support it. The author is saying there were no female descendants of Adam and Eve but the Bible says there were.
Not really. The author is saying it would have been a physical impossibility for only men to have offspring (true) but leaves out the part there were females, too. THEN he goes into the genetics problem but totally misses the point of antediluvian genetics.
Again, I don't want to debate whether or not there were other people alive at the time as this debate has raged on for centuries. I'm simply saying the biblical reasons the author gives are not correct.
Originally posted by Anciel
So Cain's wife was "just there", gotcha. Once again, you're not understanding the context of the passage (Gen 4:16) Jesus brings up to show there were only males at the time Cain took a wife.
Logically, there is no way Adam and Eve could be the parents of humanity if they had only sons and if there were no other people on the planet.