14 Apr 17
Originally posted by divegeester2nd bump for vivfy.
How many types of early homosapiens were there? How many initial homosapien individuals? How do you think they procreated and with whom?
The concept of incest is only negative because generally and in the contemporary context, the results of incestuous relations are frequently negative. However if the results were positive then perhaps incest would be a good idea.
14 Apr 17
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeEventually, when you learn the truth, you'll sing a different tune.
We bring the scepticism, you deliver the blind ignorance.
I say that without animosity or vindictiveness. What you fellas don't understand is that I know what you think you know that makes you an atheist or skeptic. And I know Jesus lives.
There are just two types of men. Those who understand their weakness in the face of the truth, and those that say to themselves I'm good enough, I don't need to be forgiven.
I'm headed for the light in eternity because I trust in Jesus Christ and his substitutionary death on the cross on my behalf.
Those who reject Christ are headed for outer darkness.
Light and darkness. That's how God terms it in his word the Bible.
But of course, the Bible is a collection of antiquated myths and fables. No rational discussion based on an objective examination of the facts will ever be had in this forum.
14 Apr 17
Originally posted by vivifyIts not implied at all. You simply made it up, or your source made it up.
I said this part is implied, based on Noah's reaction of cursing Ham's son (a common practice in the bible, punishing the child of someone who wronged or angered you; even God has done it).
14 Apr 17
Originally posted by josephwYou are not good at deep thinking. No one has rejected christ. It just is not here, except in your fantasies. I have some fantasies too.
Can you imagine what a shock it will be when all those who rejected Christ appear before God after death, when every idle word they said is played back in their own ears?
14 Apr 17
Originally posted by vivifySounds like more of a wild guess than 'implied'. Perhaps you could back it up with testimony from an expert on the original text and its implications in the cultural context?
I said this part is implied, based on Noah's reaction of cursing Ham's son (a common practice in the bible, punishing the child of someone who wronged or angered you; even God has done it).
14 Apr 17
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadhttps://bible.org/seriespage/10-nakedness-noah-and-cursing-canaan-genesis-918-1032
Sounds like more of a wild guess than 'implied'. Perhaps you could back it up with testimony from an expert on the original text and its implications in the cultural context?
"Moses did not emphasize the guilt of Noah, but rather the sin of Ham. Some have suggested various types of evil took place within Noah’s tent. While the language employed might leave room for certain sexual sins (cf. Leviticus18)."
14 Apr 17
Originally posted by apathistFantasies appear to be all you have. Take for example your post on page one. It's a fantasy to imagine anyone would seriously believe you, to begin with.
You are not good at deep thinking. No one has rejected christ. It just is not here, except in your fantasies. I have some fantasies too.
"There were other humans before adam and eve. Tribes and villages. The chosen kids were bonking animals."
Other humans before Adam and Eve? I suppose you were there and we should all just take your word for it. That's some pretty deep thinking apathist.
"Those kids"? "Bonking animals"? Man! That's really deep thinking! How many bowls did you smoke to come up with that?
"No one has rejected christ."
What planet are you living on?