bible koran and all other religions

Just to warn all you out there that this thread will be a little rant about religions in general..

Ok first, I have not read the all the bible, not read the koran for myself but this is what I feel I need to say... ( I do have many muslim and christian friends )

Ok
Garden of Eden
2 people in Eden yet this world is full of people of colour why ????? unless evolution gave people darker skins lighter skin etc Then this goes against the whole bible thing that said god made everyone and that evolution did not happen.

Noah's ark, just like Adam and Eve, if this is true then we are all interbred..
Another thought, Is incest against the will of the Bible ????
Noah and family would of ended up being inbred. if the bible states different please tell me.

Im not against people in their beliefs im really not.
Please reply I like to discuss this with you out there, maybe newbee's who have not seen many of these posts before and so are iterested in discussing this.

Just a couple of points.

The Bible never says anywhere that evolution did not happen. Some people have chosen to interpret the Bible that way, but there is no explicit indication anywhere in the Bible that evolution has never occurred.

Yes, the Garden of Eden story implies incest... it's never been suggested otherwise. But I believe you'll find that the people who actually wrote that story (you know, the ancient Israelites) felt that it was symbolic, not literally true.

Doesn't change what's written in the Bible, nor the belief of anyone who holds the Bible dear. In fact, there are lots of people written about in the Bible who are not very nice people at all, and many actions described that were not very nice actions at all. The Bible has very few illusions about the nature of humankind, it simply suggests there may be a better way to behave.

Please you know were your post is going right? BTS see you there.

Incest in The Bible:
www.clarifyingchristianity.com...

Where did Cain�s wife come from? Was it one of his sisters? What about Incest? Isn�t that against the laws of the Bible?


We all come from Adam and Eve, who had both sons and daughters (Genesis 5:4). Their children had no choice but to marry one another. If incest was prohibited then, humans would have lasted only one generation.

The first time that the Bible prohibits incest occurs during Moses� lifetime (see Leviticus 20:11 and the following verses for an example). Prior to that time it was not a written law, so it is reasonable to assume that such marital relationships were accepted (but not endorsed) from Adam�s time until then. For example, Abraham (a man who followed God faithfully) married a half sister (see Genesis 20:12), something that was prohibited 400 years later (see Leviticus 20:17 and Deuteronomy 27:22).

The Bible does not include all of the details regarding who was related to who (or what their names were), since it puts together only a framework that shows God�s plan. As a result, some people are not named, or their specific relationships are ignored. This does not mean that they were not important, it just means that recording these facts was not essential to revealing God�s plan. The bible is long already. Adding these facts would make it the size of an encyclopedia.

Who Cain married was one of these unnamed people. She was probably a sister. The only other option would be that Cain waited for one of his brothers and sisters to marry and have a daughter that he could marry. Knowing what a teenager�s hormones are like makes that seem unlikely. Also, since there is no time period implied between Genesis 4 verses 16 and 17, we can assume that Cain was married at the time he killed Abel. There is nothing in the Bible record to indicate that a generation had passed when that happened, so the �marrying a sister� theory makes the most sense.

Summarizing, it is likely that Cain married a sister, but was not committing a sin in doing so because God allowed those unions in those times.

Did God Created Different Races and Skin Color?

www.christiananswers.net...


By the way...I do not personally live by the information presented in these links I've posted. They simply offered the better answers to your questions through Google.

[Edited on 5/31/2004 by Sinobyte]

Remember the go multiply and be fruitful, incest was necesary for the propagation of the human race, later it was to preserved the purity of lineage with the royalty. It all change with christianity. It looks like christianity is the evil of the world.

Now you can burn me.

The Royal line was weak and biologically flawed and unstable due to inbreeding. Originally many think the gene pool was "clean" enough to inbreed without causing mutations. As the inbreeding continued the pool started to become tainted and it was neccessary for God to put a stop to it.

Christianity didn't stop inbreeding.

Hey if indeed we are from adan and eve like the bible tells us we all inbreeds so we all tainted, see how bible myth not always work?

I wanted to tell you that inbreeding per se is not dangerous. Regardless of whether human beings first arose with a pair of hairless apes (probably) or with a pair of de novo created human beings (I doubt it), inbreeding occurred with our distant ancestors. The issue with inbreeding is that if there are dangeous recessive genes in the original gene pool, they will have a tendency to be spread to a larger proportion of the children in the long run than with "out-breeding." Remember those words "in the long run." Popular depictions of the children of brothers and sisters as being deformed or horrible are simply inaccurate. Many generations of inbreeding must occur for recessive traits to start coming out universially, and even then, the injection of just a little "new blood" will cure the ailment.

Think of it this way... the whole human race is inbred, because humans only have children with other humans. But the rate of mutation in human beings is so high, and the genetic variability so large, that we don't observe any negative effects from the inbreeding.

Read earlier unedited versions of genesis (babylonian or sumerian, or maybe both can't remember).

Adam and Eve were not the first nor the only. The bible never says that Adam and Eve were the first and never says the were the only ones.

You are right and that is my point adan and eve were not the only ones, sometimes following the bible does not make sense, and what it make sense is view as radical. I belive on a more scientific approach to human races and origins.

Originally posted by colec156
Just to warn all you out there that this thread will be a little rant about religions in general..

Then guess what? Thats where it belongs.

Originally posted by colec156
Just to warn all you out there that this thread will be a little rant about religions in general..

Ok first, I have not read the all the bible, not read the koran for myself but this is what I feel I need to say... ( I do have many muslim and christian friends )

Ok
Garden of Eden
2 people in Eden yet this world is full of people of colour why ????? unless evolution gave people darker skins lighter skin etc Then this goes against the whole bible thing that said god made everyone and that evolution did not happen.

Noah's ark, just like Adam and Eve, if this is true then we are all interbred..
Another thought, Is incest against the will of the Bible ????
Noah and family would of ended up being inbred. if the bible states different please tell me.

Im not against people in their beliefs im really not.
Please reply I like to discuss this with you out there, maybe newbee's who have not seen many of these posts before and so are iterested in discussing this.

Well, you are partly correct with your evolution thing. Unless evolution does not exist, then color could not have happened......try to tell that to a Christian.

There is though, what some believe to be a reference to the origin of colored people in the Bible. Well, in most versions it has been removed to my best knowledge. Do a search on the Curse of Ham. In any case, it could eliminate the evolution problem.