(May 2, 2016 at 8:31 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: First of all, the scriptures "are of no private interpretation", you must let the scripture interpret itself.

Cain was never included in the Genealogy of Adam, thereby showing that he WAS NOT Adam's son.

Quote:Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. - 1 John 3:12

Do the math.

Do...do you know what math is?

(May 2, 2016 at 8:40 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote:

(May 2, 2016 at 8:31 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: First of all, the scriptures "are of no private interpretation", you must let the scripture interpret itself.

Cain was never included in the Genealogy of Adam, thereby showing that he WAS NOT Adam's son.




Do the math.

Do...do you know what math is?

1+15=parsley

(May 2, 2016 at 8:39 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: "Allow the scripture to interpret itself"?   That sentence makes absolutely no sense.

It makes perfect sense.

If you read a book for example, do you draw a conclusion after the first chapter, or does it make more sense to read the whole thing and let the story unfold on it's own.

(May 2, 2016 at 8:40 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: Do...do you know what math is?

it's a figure of speech bud

(May 2, 2016 at 8:48 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(May 2, 2016 at 8:39 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: "Allow the scripture to interpret itself"?   That sentence makes absolutely no sense.

It makes perfect sense.

If you read a book for example, do you draw a conclusion after the first chapter, or does it make more sense to read the whole thing and let the story unfold on it's own.

(May 2, 2016 at 8:40 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: Do...do you know what math is?

it's a figure of speech bud

And there are millions of interpretations of this one book.  One book, which some people think was literally written by god himself.  Except when we read it, people have all sorts of different ideas about what the book really says.  Sects have actually killed each other over what they think the book says.  Preachers have used the book to excuse all sorts of crimes against humanity: genocide, rape, racism, slavery, etc.  
Gee, you would think if the book was anything special, and god actually spoke to his followers, then anyone who read the book would understand what it says.  Is it possible that the book was not written by god?  Or is it possible that god is unable to clarify his own instructions?

The point is if the interpretation doesn't fall in line with rest of the bible then it is wrong.

You think that Eve committing adultery in Eden was a weird interpretation, but I clearly showed how it lines up with scripture.

If Cain was not Adams son according to the scripture, he obviously had to be the son of someone else.

(May 2, 2016 at 4:53 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(May 2, 2016 at 3:38 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: 1) Constructed the laws of the universe, including the requirements for how the bipedal, intelligent apes inhabiting one small desert corner of the third rock from one star out of trillions (that we can detect), should think and eat and dress and screw.

2) Constructed those laws in such a way that the penalty for failure to adhere to them is a penalty of eternal torment.

3) Offered "pardon" to those who worship said entity and accept that pardon thereby.

If I came into your neighborhood with a crew of heavily-armed men, gathered everyone in the central square, and told them at gunpoint that they were doing something I didn't like, so they could either tell me I'm the greatest and accept my pardon, or else I'd have to shoot them... what would you call me?

Your "God" has done exactly that, by allegedly being both lawmaker and judge, especially since I only have your word and the written words of long-dead barbarians to tell me that it's even a real thing.

I think you're way off base.

There was no law in the beginning. What law was Abraham under?

God put man here with only one restriction.

Unbelief is what caused man to fall, therefore it will take belief to bring us back. It's quite simple.

You're trying to use the Covenant as your excuse for the concept of hell and eternal punishment? Seriously!?

What. A. Surprise... a cult that claims believing in its claims is the only way to be saved. 

You've completely failed to address the point I raised, which is that your current theology is that of the servant of a monster. You can deny it all you like, but it's plain to see. You're the one who proposed that we're subject to the penalty of law unless we accept pardon via acceptance of vicarious atonement by the very being (don't quibble with that "no it was the Son" bit, unless you're willing to concede that God and Jesus are two entirely different beings), and I pointed out to you why being the Craftsman of the Universe, including setting up all the rules by which it operates, from physics to "sin", as you claim, means that the being is no better than a mobster.

(May 2, 2016 at 8:31 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: First of all, the scriptures "are of no private interpretation", you must let the scripture interpret itself.

Cain was never included in the Genealogy of Adam, thereby showing that he WAS NOT Adam's son.

Quote:Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. - 1 John 3:12

Do the math.

Okay, I'll bite.  If you're suggesting Cain is the son of Lucifer, who do you say was his mother?  Are there any other women yet except Eve?  

But no, I have no questions which I urgently need a Christian to answer.  I just read this exchange and thought .. that's weird.

Genesis 4 verse 1 seems to think that Adam was Cain's father.

Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man.”

(May 2, 2016 at 9:02 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The point is if the interpretation doesn't fall in line with rest of the bible then it is wrong.

You think that Eve committing adultery in Eden was a weird interpretation, but I clearly showed how it lines up with scripture.

If Cain was not Adams son according to the scripture, he obviously had to be the son of someone else.

Or...the language of the scripture is so vague and simplistic (dare I say symbolic?) it practically INVITES multiple competing interpretations; any or all of which can easily be perceived as "correct" by the individual doing the interpreting...

Did we get past "obey or burn motherfuckers*" yet?

*optional