Is it true that you believe that that nothing was in existence until 6,000 years ago (Supernovas and Triceratops alike) and that we all come from Adam and Eve, who had children who would then mate with each other and produce more children, which would lead to a population which God would destroy in a flood 4,500 years ago, of which the one surviving family would mate with each other and produce the rest of humanity, including us?
2007-03-10 12:36:09 · 11 answers · asked by Chipee 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Christians are so stupid they do not realize the absurd implications of their faith.
2007-03-10 12:49:13 · answer #1 · answered by omnivoreboy1960 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Nice try.
The bible does indicate that the earth is not much more than 6,000 years old. I know that we have always been told otherwise, but I trust God to know more about it than scientists.
Your incest logic will conclude like this (I've heard it sooo many times): If sex between siblings was ok by God back then and now God says it is wrong, then God changed his mind, which means that God made a mistake and is not omniscient (all knowing).
The next time the earth is in need of re-population, and you and your siblings are the only ones who can re-populate it, and you are righteous before God, He may let you have sex with them. Outside of those circumstances, it's wrong, not because I say so, but because He says so.
Again, nice try.
2007-03-10 21:13:52 · answer #2 · answered by JV 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I'm a Chrisitan but i don't buy the whole Adam and Eve story when there is proof of dinosaurs. I believe that God came in the form of Jesus and that he died on the cross for our sins. And just because you are a Christian doesn't mean you believe in incest ok?!
2007-03-10 20:49:11 · answer #3 · answered by chica™ 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It's kind of hard NOT to believe in incest... I mean, it's not like two relatives suddenly disappear when they have sex with each other...
A better wording might be "Christians, do you support incest?"
(As for the actual question, I'm not Christian, so I can't be answering it.)
2007-03-10 20:57:21 · answer #4 · answered by Nanashi 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
considering the negative effects inbreeding has on the offspring, can you imagine how different people would have been back then? we would have been much smarter, probably had less arms, more legs, maybe a few more eyes. we all know inbreeding causes many birth defects, so compared to back then, we're all a bunch of mentally retarded mutated freaks! sweet!
2007-03-13 09:09:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Haha...that gave me a bit of a chuckle.
We are all victims of incest! Yay!
2007-03-10 20:52:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Apparently back then it wasn't a sin. Once again, Christian morals shift whenever convenient.
2007-03-10 20:49:54 · answer #7 · answered by Jedi 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Is this a question from the heart? Or a question to "bash" Christianity? One day, you will know the answer to all things.
2007-03-10 20:54:07 · answer #8 · answered by eddee12 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes, Chipee, I do. It's called faith.
2007-03-10 21:00:03 · answer #9 · answered by William's Mum 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Who else would people reproduce with then? Donkeys? Beastiality isn't any better, you know.
2007-03-10 20:50:54 · answer #10 · answered by Jay 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋