Land Bridge

[E25280]

If Adam and Eve were the first humans where did Cain get his wife?
 
There are many errors in the bible. Creation is just another one. Remember the central message; Faith

The bible clearly states that Adam and Eve had many sons and daughters.  So, Cain's wife was most likely one of his sisters.  Therefore, there is no "error" as you put it.

You have proven a point that basing an opinion on limited knowledge can lead you to wrong conclusions.  This is a lesson everyone should be mindful of whether studying science or the Bible.

[kvuo75]

I always had a feeling this game attracted scientifically/skeptically/logically-thinking people.

txmom: <S> but wtf? Do you reject science as a whole? Or just the things that directly contradict your Sacred Text (TM)?

Ahhhh we have nuclear weapons, spacecraft, computers.. but plate tectonics and evolution...   nahhhhh thats too "out there"!

[texasmom]

You mentioned that you home school one of your sons.  When you teach him about this stuff, do you actually use text books or trips to the local natural history museum or do you just crack open the Bible?

What better natural history book could you find than the Bible? There isn't one.

I always had a feeling this game attracted scientifically/skeptically/logically-thinking people.
txmom: <S> but wtf? Do you reject science as a whole? Or just the things that directly contradict your Sacred Text (TM)?  Ahhhh we have nuclear weapons, spacecraft, computers.. but plate tectonics and evolution...   nahhhhh thats too "out there"!

No, I absolutely don't reject science ~ I just understand that God made man in his own image.  And for us as humans (who are still making an attempt to even comprehend how all of the elements of nature are intertwined) to be so arrogant as to believe that God, who is all-knowing, isn't the designer of everything around us is foolish.

And LOL at the notion (which it appears that y'all are trying to portray here) that anyone who believes in God as the creator is like the crazy God-lady off of the movie "The Mist" is just laughable.

[storch]

the "science" of evolution and geography are at best pseudo science and just as much a religion as any these detractors on these boards attempt to deride.

[Xargos]

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

[Maverick]

The bible clearly states that Adam and Eve had many sons and daughters.  So, Cain's wife was most likely one of his sisters.  Therefore, there is no "error" as you put it.

So what you are saying is that someplace like Arkansas is similar to the garden of eden because brothers and sisters get married..........  

[moot]

What better natural history book could you find than the Bible? There isn't one.

But there are just as "unbiased" stories in just about every single myth and legend ever improvised by man.  You arguing this just shows you don't really understand the intolerance of science for irrationality. 

No, I absolutely don't reject science ~ I just understand that God made man in his own image. 

You understand God's mind?

And for us as humans (who are still making an attempt to even comprehend how all of the elements of nature are intertwined) to be so arrogant as to believe that God, who is all-knowing, isn't the designer of everything around us is foolish.

Where does science pretend this?  Science isn't interested in the supernatural.

And LOL at the notion (which it appears that y'all are trying to portray here) that anyone who believes in God as the creator is like the crazy God-lady off of the movie "The Mist" is just laughable.

Might as well be.. Back in the medieval times, some of today's technology, achieved by scientific protocol, would seem like magic or heretic to that time's people (eclesiastic esp.), as well as some of today's accepted (even by religious people) social/lifestyle trends.. They would refuse those trends and habits the same way you "reject science". 

The idea that science and religion are mutualy exclusive is the first mistake.

As far as the bible is concerned... It's got no answers and all the answers at the same time.  It will probably survive down the ages as a perpetual parable for man's life, progress, and ultimate fate. To pit it and science against one another is completely missing the point.

[ROX]

So what you are saying is that someplace like Arkansas is similar to the garden of eden because brothers and sisters get married..........  

OK...being an Arkansas resident (not native) I can tell you that brothers & sisters do not marry (it just seems like it).

ROX

[VERTEX]

the "science" of evolution and geography are at best pseudo science and just as much a religion as any these detractors on these boards attempt to deride.

Storch, I have to know if you are being sarcastic, its hard to "read" sarcasm in print. My hunch is you are being very sarcastic, but please confirm.

[moot]

So much for domesticated breeds.. Can you get much more obvious than that?  Flat Earth here we come (back) !

[VERTEX]

But there are just as "unbiased" stories in just about every single myth and legend ever improvised by man.  You arguing this just shows you don't really understand the intolerance of science for irrationality.  You understand God's mind?Where does science pretend this?  Science isn't interested in the supernatural.Might as well be.. Back in the medieval times, some of today's technology, achieved by scientific protocol, would seem like magic or heretic to that time's people (eclesiastic esp.), as well as some of today's accepted (even by religious people) social/lifestyle trends.. They would refuse those trends and habits the same way you "reject science". 

The idea that science and religion are mutualy exclusive is the first mistake.

As far as the bible is concerned... It's got no answers and all the answers at the same time.  It will probably survive down the ages as a perpetual parable for man's life, progress, and ultimate fate. To pit it and science against one another is completely missing the point.

Science is about what we know, religion is about what we have faith in. They are most indeed mutually exclusive. Science and religion are founded on two completely different premises.

And the bible is if not the worst, a close second to the worst reference regarding earth history.

Texasmom, please google Laurentide ice sheet, and wisconsin glaciation, you will find loads of info on earth history going back to the last glacial maximum, about 12k years before present. Also, do some research on earth history in general. Study the geologic time scale. It really is quite interesting.

Also, read up on cosmology to get a feel for the workings of the universe as a whole. Another very interesting topic.

Enjoy knowlege for its own sake.

[Reschke]

All very interesting comments here. I can't wait to see where this ends.

[texasmom]

Science is about what we know, religion is about what we have faith in. They are most indeed mutually exclusive. Science and religion are founded on two completely different premises.

Why are they mutually exclusive? Science is merely the study of God's world around us.  I think that more than ever, those two are combined, at each instance I learn anything science related.

The absence of acknowledging God's handiwork in any scientific study does not make it not so. 

I will, btw, look at what you recommended.

[moot]

God is no God if mere men can work out what he's on about.  Science is reason, religion is faith. That's all there is to it.  Neither of those two contradict or refute the other.

[texasmom]

You understand God's mind?

No, what I said is that I understand that God made man in his own image.  "In his own image" is not "in the form of a few random cells which eventually formed some early life... which evolved into apes... which evolved into someone like Lucy... which evolved into modern man."  I don't need to understand God's mind to know what is written about that.

"As far as the bible is concerned... It's got no answers and all the answers at the same time.  It will probably survive down the ages as a perpetual parable for man's life, progress, and ultimate fate. To pit it and science against one another is completely missing the point.

Actually, why pit them against one another? To reconcile one with another is the obvious choice.  The hinderance in doing that would be on the part of the scientists refusing to add God as having created everything into any of their equations. 

In fact, you could probably preface every scientific theory with this silent phrase, and it would be an accurate portrayal of any intent in scientific "progress:"

Absent of God, how could this have happened?