nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 41:
Line 41: − + + + + + + + + + +
→...although it would still be considered [[incest]]: Response to TheDecider
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:28, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:28, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
Philip - There is no formulation which excludes the necessary incidence of incest (whether inter- or intra-generataional) from the historicity of Adam and Even and their decendants. And, since Cain and Seth are said to have -seperate- lineages, this rules out the possibility that either copulated with a daughter of the other, otherwise their distinct lineages would be interwoven by further inbreeding. There simply is no explanation for reproduction of humanity sans incest, and the Bible doesn't offer one. If you believe that Adam and Eve were the only two people on Earth, then it follows that the subsequent several generations would be heavily inbred. In your effort to find an "ethically acceptable" rational, you're resorting to tortured explanations and meaningless equivocations. The "difference" of the incestuous relations between siblings or parent and child is immaterial, and since God neither prohibits such acts or punishes them in Genesis, its reasonable to believe that incest was permitted. Applying logic to these cultural myths is what leads people to realize what they really are: creative stories, not historic facts. --[[User:TheDecider|TheDecider]] 15:05, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:Philip - There is no formulation which excludes the necessary incidence of incest (whether inter- or intra-generataional) from the historicity of Adam and Even and their decendants. And, since Cain and Seth are said to have -seperate- lineages, this rules out the possibility that either copulated with a daughter of the other, otherwise their distinct lineages would be interwoven by further inbreeding. There simply is no explanation for reproduction of humanity sans incest, and the Bible doesn't offer one. If you believe that Adam and Eve were the only two people on Earth, then it follows that the subsequent several generations would be heavily inbred. In your effort to find an "ethically acceptable" rational, you're resorting to tortured explanations and meaningless equivocations. The "difference" of the incestuous relations between siblings or parent and child is immaterial, and since God neither prohibits such acts or punishes them in Genesis, its reasonable to believe that incest was permitted. Applying logic to these cultural myths is what leads people to realize what they really are: creative stories, not historic facts. --[[User:TheDecider|TheDecider]] 15:05, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::"''There is no formulation which excludes the necessary incidence of incest...''". I haven't disputed that.
::"''...since Cain and Seth are said to have -seperate- lineages, this rules out the possibility that either copulated with a daughter of the other...''". Where does it say that they had lineages that were so separate that it rules out them marrying from another lineage? And remember, there were more than two lineages, as Adam and Eve had other sons and daughters.
::"''...the subsequent several generations would be heavily inbred.''" Not so. Inbreeding is a rapid accumulation of genetic defects caused by breeding from two individuals that, to a large extent, share the same defects (having inherited them from the same parents, etc.). But as Adam and Eve were made without defects, there is no inbreeding problem.
::"''...you're resorting to tortured explanations and meaningless equivocations.''" In saying that, you're resorting to sweeping statements that don't actually address the issue.
::"''The "difference" of the incestuous relations between siblings or parent and child is immaterial, and since God neither prohibits such acts or punishes them in Genesis...''". Just taking Genesis, for neither act (intercourse with Even/intercourse with sister) can we say that it was not punished, because Genesis doesn't say that either occurred (i.e. we can't say that God didn't punish intercourse with Eve, because intercourse might have been with a sister, and we can't say that He didn't punish intercourse with a sister, as it might have been with Eve).
::However, Abraham ''did'' marry his half-sister, and there was no punishment. And if we go beyond Genesis, Jesus indicates that creation provides the basis for marriage between one man and one woman, indicating that intercourse between Eve and a son would have been wrong from the beginning. The same is not true for intercourse between brother and sister (or uncle and niece).
::"''Applying logic to these cultural myths is what leads people to realize what they really are: creative stories, not historic facts.''". Which you've failed to demonstrate because your "logic" has failed. Would you agree that when criticism of an argument can't be found, the argument is more likely to be correct?
::[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:10, 10 May 2007 (EDT)