Author Topic: Incest (Read 21664 times)

Brownie · « **Reply #25 on:** January 23, 2016, 04:53:00 AM »

I think my entire post needs to be quoted for it to be understood Shaker, that isolated bit doesn't make sense - though it may be a bit of a drag for someone to tread through an entire post. In any case, does anyone think that incest was defined because of genetic problems caused by consanguinity (? sp)? My view is that it was more because family structure, rather than kinship network, became more important.

2Corrie · « **Reply #26 on:** January 23, 2016, 11:08:32 AM »

Quote from: Floo on January 22, 2016, 02:32:41 PM

If all the population of the planet drowned in the flood except Noah and his family, they would have had to bonk like rabbits to repopulate the Earth!

Have you done the maths?

2Corrie · « **Reply #27 on:** January 23, 2016, 11:12:49 AM »

Quote from: Hope on January 21, 2016, 05:21:18 PM

This answer highlights the likelihood that the story is a theological treatment, rather than a historical one.

The Lord's genealogy is traced back to Adam

2Corrie · « **Reply #28 on:** January 23, 2016, 11:14:55 AM »

Quote from: Owlswing on January 21, 2016, 05:19:27 PM

. . . and their two sons (no daughters) of course!

They had other children it is written.

floo · « **Reply #29 on:** January 23, 2016, 11:32:37 AM »

Quote from: 2Corrie on January 23, 2016, 11:12:49 AM

The Lord's genealogy is traced back to Adam

Who is a mythical character, in all probability.

Brownie · « **Reply #30 on:** January 23, 2016, 11:44:34 AM »

Yes floo but many believe (including me) that the story was written to illustrate a truth - and there were obviously 'first people', human beings, and not many of them. They certainly wouldn't have thought in terms of 'brother and sister', 'cousin and aunt', never mind stepfather or sister-in-law.

Leonard James · « **Reply #31 on:** January 23, 2016, 11:50:55 AM »

Quote from: 2Corrie on January 23, 2016, 11:14:55 AM

They had other children it is written.

"it is written" ... three little words that can make an otherwise intelligent person believe the daftest of things.

jeremyp · « **Reply #32 on:** January 23, 2016, 01:23:30 PM »

Quote from: 2Corrie on January 23, 2016, 11:12:49 AM

The Lord's genealogy is traced back to Adam

What's special about that?

floo · « **Reply #33 on:** January 23, 2016, 03:14:29 PM »

Quote from: Leonard James on January 23, 2016, 11:50:55 AM

"it is written" ... three little words that can make an otherwise intelligent person believe the daftest of things.

Exactly!

Brownie · « **Reply #34 on:** January 24, 2016, 12:07:23 PM »

''It is written'' may be an annoying phrase to some but it is no more than a bit of back up which is forever being used on forums. I clearly remember saying something once and another poster, with a different pov, came back with, ''David Starkey said....''

. I'm sure you, floo, have used the words of A N Other to back up your statements from time to time, or at least said, 'Other people or A N Other thinks so too'. Most people do it. It can be irritating but not a big deal.

Whatever, there have been some quite interesting posts on this thread, made in response to your opening post, so why not read, think about and respond to them instead of latching on to something so small. No offence meant.

Shaker · « **Reply #35 on:** January 24, 2016, 12:15:11 PM »

Quote from: Brownie on January 24, 2016, 12:07:23 PM

''It is written'' may be an annoying phrase to some but it is no more than a bit of back up which is forever being used on forums. I clearly remember saying something once and another poster, with a different pov, came back with, ''David Starkey said....'' . I'm sure you, floo, have used the words of A N Other to back up your statements from time to time, or at least said, 'Other people or A N Other thinks so too'. Most people do it. It can be irritating but not a big deal.

You're forgetting the salient differences here - firstly that when somebody cites A. N. Other as a source for something, that source can be checked and a specific statement can be compared with the rest of their corpus of work. Secondly, and far more importantly, nobody is suggesting that A. N. Other's sources are supernatural edicts which can't be questioned, criticised and challenged. They are not held to be the absolute and immutable truth. In a religious context "It is written" is used in such as way as to imply or explicitly state: "This is the final truth. God has said so and that's that."

Leonard James · « **Reply #36 on:** January 24, 2016, 01:06:59 PM »

Quote from: Shaker on January 24, 2016, 12:15:11 PM

In a religious context "It is written" is used in such as way as to imply or explicitly state: "This is the final truth. God has said so and that's that."

Precisely! And the gullible are taken in by it.

Brownie · « **Reply #37 on:** January 24, 2016, 02:16:18 PM »

Shaker, you make a fair point which I take on board. I can only speak for myself: I don't use the phrase, ''It is written'' (which reminds me somewhat of that ancient television series, before your time I am sure, called 'Kung Fu'), and haven't come across anyone who does except on forums. More commonly, people will say, ''According to the Bible'', or ''...scripture'', but it is up to who listens whether or not they take the scriptures as the final authority. Indeed, most Christians accept there are different interpretations and a lot of them, including me, are not literalists.

There are more comments on this thread than ''It is written'', insightful and thought provoking; whether the reader agrees or not, they are worth reading and are in response to floo's op.

(Len - you, grrrr, Spanish thingy, onion - you do labour the point! Complete with exclamation mark!!!!!!!)
shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview
)

Leonard James · « **Reply #38 on:** January 24, 2016, 02:19:33 PM »

Quote from: Brownie on January 24, 2016, 02:16:18 PM

(Len - you, grrrr, Spanish thingy, onion - you do labour the point! Complete with exclamation mark!!!!!!!)
shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview
)

I try to live up to the reputation people forge for me.

Brownie · « **Reply #39 on:** January 24, 2016, 02:29:06 PM »

That is hughly obvious dear boy

!!!!!! Hope you are well. Adios amigo.

2Corrie · « **Reply #40 on:** January 24, 2016, 02:31:04 PM »

Quote from: Leonard James on January 24, 2016, 01:06:59 PM

Precisely! And the gullible are taken in by it.

and the more gullible fail to read it and believe their own assumptions (like Adam and Eve had two sons (no daughters)) ! It's ok for anyone but a Christian to refer to the Bible as a source of reference for their post isn't it!

floo · « **Reply #41 on:** January 24, 2016, 02:33:20 PM »

Quote from: 2Corrie on January 24, 2016, 02:31:04 PM

and the more gullible fail to read it and believe their own assumptions (like Adam and Eve had two sons (no daughters)) ! It's ok for anyone but a Christian to refer to the Bible as a source of reference for their post isn't it!

The gullible believe the Adam and Eve fantasy is factual!