Christians, genuinely help me make sense of this. I don't get it.

[Anonymous No.23645502]

>makes one man and one woman
>tells them to be fruitful and multiply
>sends you to hell if you commit incest

[Anonymous No.23645505]

Now I've heard it said that it was permissible in the beginning because there was no other choice for humans, but that after he commanded it should no longer be done is when one can be damned for committing the act. However, does this not open up the concept of sin to be so malleable it borders on arbitrariness? If what makes a sin a sin is something that God can (and does) change the status of whilst the act in and of itself remains the same, how could you ever really know where he stands on the matter as a whole? In other words, if the only differentiating factor between what is and isn't a sin is 'because God says so', but God doesn't always say the same thing, then I can't help but wonder if the same goes for what he considers to be a benevolent act. This blurs the idea that God is all good for me, although I would like to believe it.

[Anonymous No.23645602]

>>23645502
Take time to think. Stop being a sub-100 troll.

[Anonymous No.23645607]

>>23645602
Read the follow-up. >>23645505

[Anonymous No.23645623]

The book was written by low IQ desert people who didn't have the understanding of literary structure that we do today.

[Anonymous No.23645627]

In the beginning, incest was a necessity. After humans bred more, it wasn't. It's as much for religious reasons as is it practical: look at royal families of Germany and Spain for an example of the results of inbreeding.

[Anonymous No.23645644]

>>23645502
Cain took wives from the land of Nod. There were other humans around, Adam & Eve were just the first pair of rational souls, also [insert evolutionary apologetics here]

>>23645505
God's word, the Logos, is unchanging, although specific laws like the Mosaic law is mutable (Hebrews 7:12 "For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.")
The Logos has this to say: Matthew 22:36-40: ""Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He [Jesus] said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. ' This is the greatest and first commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'"
So basically the Golden rule, on which morality is founded, and essentially unchanging

[Anonymous No.23645650]

>>23645502
>sends you to hell if you commit incest
None of those laws were in place yet, those don't show up until after Moses gets the commandments. Only rule in the garden was don't eat the fruit

[Anonymous No.23645654]

>>23645502
Chastity is a virtue, the root of the word incest is in "inchaste"

[Anonymous No.23645661]

God can do whatever he wants.

[Anonymous No.23645670]

>make delicious pineapple
>put it in a hard shell
God???

[Anonymous No.23645672]

>>23645670
kek

[Anonymous No.23645946]

? Adam and Eve weren’t related.

Besides, incest among siblings isn’t necessarily sinful.

[Anonymous No.23645955]

>>23645502
Where does it say you go to hell if you commit incest?

[Anonymous No.23645958]

>>23645502
All you will receive in response will be mumbo-jumbo, psycho-babble word salad or other types of nonsense.

[Anonymous No.23645970]

>>23645644
>'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'

It really sucks when you have a neighbor that's a rapist and you have to consent to being raped all the time since you don't want to resist and make him feel bad since you have to love him as you love yourself (and I don't want to feel bad).

[Anonymous No.23645976]

>>23645502
Adam wasn't the first homo sapien/homo erectus. Later when Cain married it is after he was exiled for killing Abel (ie she was not his sister). Adam was just the first person to be formed in God's image (having the ability to conceptualize the transcendent). All pre-Adam people were covered in "beasts of the field".

[Anonymous No.23646039]

>>23645670
the struggle is part of the reward

[Anonymous No.23646065]

>>23645623
>Nooooo I must make everything fit in my mould!
At best you're making a datapoint which allows you to maybe be found within the vast size of the Universe so you won't have to spend your days alone.

[Anonymous No.23646102]

>>23645970
How would you want to be treated if you were a rapist? I think if I were a rapist, it would be best for me to be put somewhere where I can't hurt anyone.
If I was posting a very silly strawman of a very beautiful, and venerable belief system, I would want another poster to correct me, too

[Anonymous No.23646197]

>>23645502
they were the Lord's creation so they were perfect
disease, as the kind that comes from generations of incest, arises from errors multiplying in the genetic material
if the genetic material is "virgin", there is no error, hence nothing to multiply

this is of course speculation but feel free to ask any biologist (without mentioning the Adam and Eve part)

[Anonymous No.23646204]

>>23645502
ITT: Christians realising their religion makes no sense but clinging onto their delusions anyway.

[Anonymous No.23646233]

>>23646102
>be famous serial rapist
>authorities give women free access to your cell
>have sex nonstop with worshiping fangirls so your rape impulses are sated
>however the sex is inevitably consensual
>even if you're in rape mode while you're raping your penpals, you can't ignore that they're into it
>no matter how hard you try, you are in fact not raping the women you rape
>your whole purpose, your very lifeblood, vilified into petty roleplay for thots
YAMERO...

[Anonymous No.23646236]

>>23645502
Tell me anon, did anything happen in between the creation of Adam and Eve and the writing of the books Deuteronomy and Leviticus?

[Anonymous No.23646269]

>>23645502
More like
>makes one man and one woman
>tells them to be fruitful and multiply
>allows men to create bizarre marriage laws where women are incentivized to break the marriage and take half the man's shit because she doesn't feel le love anymore
>sends you to hell if you have loving, monogamous sex with a person you love minus getting married
Being a Christian dude in this dating hellscape is pretty brutal, desu

[Anonymous No.23646279]

>>23645970
At this point I can't tell if this is memeing or if fedoras actually believe Christians believe this. Anyways, here's your (You)

[Anonymous No.23646344]

>>23646204
Are you retarded? Adam and Eve were not siblings, parents, anything like that. How can people who are not be committing incest? It’s not possible.

Are you people fucking dumb? Can you not read?

[Anonymous No.23646352]

>>23645502
Other people existed before them. Adam and Eve were the first of God's special people, aka jews

[Anonymous No.23646364]

>>23646344
Pretty sure the op is referring to their children, not them.

[Anonymous No.23646436]

>>23645644
There's no mention of Cain or Abel's age before Cain's exile, and we know it is said that Adam and Eve had many more children than just them two. Wherever Cain found his wife, it was a relative (sister or niece).

[Anonymous No.23646531]

>>23646364
Almost as dumb because they’re progeny of already fallen mankind. They were sinners.

[Anonymous No.23646819]

The real question is 'who the fuck was Cain worried about'?
>Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.”
>But the Lord said to him, “Not so; anyone who kills Cain will suffer vengeance seven times over.” Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him. So Cain went out from the Lord’s presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.
There were obviously some type of barbarian types also walking on the earth at that time.

[Anonymous No.23646892]

>>23646819
His exile is not merely a matter of physical location, but the presence of God himself. It's possible the siblings born long before his exile were spread over different lands (without being considered exiled), and would've killed him after they'd found out what happened.

[Anonymous No.23646896]

>>23646279
>christcuck
>struggles with the obvious
every time

[Anonymous No.23646916]

>sends you to hell if you commit incest
Leviticus says that men can't fuck their sisters but there's large amounts of Rabbinical commentary that create loopholes around this (the tl;dr is that not fucking your sister isn't one of the 617 Mitzvot but continuing the Jewish race is so if you have to fuck your sister to continue the Jewish race then you're actually required to).

Additionally, Yahweh specifically says that a large number of marriages are not valid (such as marrying your sister, or your grandmother), but that doesn't mean that coupling with them is invalid (in fact it's actually required under some circumstances). Also, keep in mind that cousin marriage is not invalid, and is in fact meritorious and even required in some circumstances. So, the children are just bastards.

>>23646819
Gentiles. Until Abraham the Neshama was passed from father to son.

[Anonymous No.23646921]

>>23646892
>It's possible the siblings born long before his exile
Interesting. Is there anything that talks about Adam and Eve's children between having Cain and Abel and having Seth?
It's also interesting to think about Cain's wife. Was she exiled just for being married to him?

[Anonymous No.23646944]

>>23646921
>Is there anything that talks about Adam and Eve's children between having Cain and Abel and having Seth?
Not that I'm aware of, all that's said is that they had tons of children, but doesn't specify as to when which makes it hard to say since they supposedly lived to be 800 years old or something like that. As far as Cain's wife goes, scripture says they married after his exile, but I don't know if that means they had no clue of each other's existence before that.

[Anonymous No.23647062]

>>23645502
>sends you to hell if you commit incest
Moral laws' application change over time - incest isn't technically part of the ten commandments.

[Anonymous No.23647072]

>>23645502
>sends you to hell if you commit incest
Show me the passage of the bible that says this

[Anonymous No.23647079]

>>23646236
This is the real answer. The weird pre-Mosaic shit in Genesis is intended to be weird an unnatural. Also it's not really right to see Eve as a "clone" of Adam.

[Anonymous No.23647097]

>>23645946
He's talking about the sons of Adam and Eve

[Anonymous No.23647106]

>>23647072
>None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD.
What happens to those who disobey the Lord, anon? I suppose you can plow your sister if you repent earnestly afterwards. Good luck.

[Anonymous No.23647168]

My god I don’t know why this is so funny. I have some chaw in my lip and just dribbled all over myself like a retard.

[Anonymous No.23647220]

>>23647106
>you go to hell if you sin
NGMI.
It is explicit in the bible that EVERY SINGLE human being in the history of earth has sinned (Except Jesus), and that the only way of getting to heaven is if you accept Jesus' salvation. Plus, that law of the jews came way after Adam and Eve. Plus, it is also explicitly said that the law of the jews is OBSOLETE for us gentiles.

[Anonymous No.23647241]

>>23647220
I'd bet you'd be fun at parties man

[Anonymous No.23647242]

>>23647220
Next Sunday as your pastor if it's okay for you to marry your single mom. Let us know how it goes.

[Anonymous No.23647253]

>>23647242
Yes, in the beginning I was. We are having the same conversation for the third time and you are entering peak insanity and I am entering glorious ascension.

[Anonymous No.23647255]

>>23647242
There is a difference between sinning and going to hell. There is a difference between something bad and something that the bible explicitly says it's bad. The bible never explicitly says that it was bad for Adam and Eve, their children, and the children of Noe to commit incest.

[Anonymous No.23647259]

>>23645502
Nah bro I'm not into wasting my time in EPIC INTELLECTUAL DEBATES!!! with retards like yourself.

[Anonymous No.23647260]

>>23647255
If Jesus died then what makes you think he came back as a non sinner? Can you give us examples of Jesus not sinning besides what was written?

[Anonymous No.23647266]

>>23647259
>he thinks he's an intellectual

[Anonymous No.23647269]

>>23647260
>he came back as a non sinner
Huh? I never said he came back as a non sinner. Jesus never sinned from the start.

1 Peter 2:21-22:

21 To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.

22 “He committed no sin,
and no deceit was found in his mouth.”

[Anonymous No.23647274]

>>23647220
That book is ancient by the way. We have no records of Jesus childhood besides him running away before he was even born.
>Son of God
>Can't afford a middle class upbringing so goes to Jew town likely as a rich man from frank incense and gifts of gold.

[Anonymous No.23647278]

>>23647269
sigh...
It's MA'AM OKAY???

[Anonymous No.23647281]

>>23647274
The book of Luke gives you records of Jesus childhood and upbringing. He was not raised as a rich kid.

[Anonymous No.23647288]

>>23647266
The Cambridge English encyclopedia defines intellectual thusly:
>very educated and interested in studying and other activities that involve careful thinking and mental effort
Considering I'm a writer and that I am working on an advanced degree from Harvard, I am by definition an intellectual.

[Anonymous No.23647289]

>>23647281
Why not the other books?

[Anonymous No.23647293]

>>23645502
the ancient Jews had no way to verify the historicity of early humanity
modern religious views on the matter hold that when humanity first gained sentience, we all gained souls from God at the same time
if you think the historicity of Adam and Eve is the most important and critical part of Christianity or even Judaism, you are doing religion wrong

[Anonymous No.23647298]

>>23647289
Matthew and John only knew people when he was an adult. Mark worked for Peter, which also knew Jesus when he was an adult. Luke was the only real historian belong them, so he was able to investigate in his past.

[Anonymous No.23647301]

>>23647288
The Cambridge English encyclopedia defines retarded larping faggot thusly:
(You)

[Anonymous No.23647309]

>>23647298
Wow you believe the veracity of 4 people over one person

[Anonymous No.23647320]

>>23647309
How do you know if I'm a christian or not? I'm only correcting you about the scriptures of the Bible.

[Anonymous No.23647324]

>>23645502
>genuinely
You're not genuinely looking for help and that's obvious. You just wanted to create a circle jerking thread for all the tourists from plebbit.
>>23645623
>>23645958
>>23646204
>>23646896

[Anonymous No.23647359]

>>23647324
You can be provocative and curious at the same time. If you can't handle a baity title I've no clue why you're even on this site desu. My follow-up is in the very next post if you're interested >>23645505

[Anonymous No.23647390]

>>23647359
Sure, buddy. That's why you bear false witness and speak slander in your reply while you try to claim I'm wrong. You just want to waste Christians' time and troll. I've seen people like you more than enough to see through your lies and facade. Your "follow up" is simply full of more of the same dishonesty and false modesty anyway. I don't care for the idolatry in the OP pic either, and I was about to call you an apostate for such but it's clear you're not even interesting in having faith and believing the gospel anyway.

[Anonymous No.23647394]

>>23647359
Also
>desu
Stupid newfag.

[Anonymous No.23647406]

>>23647390
Just say you don't know the answer and go cry somewhere else homo.

[Anonymous No.23647438]

>>23645502
>>any two humans have a 0.1% difference in DNA

according to your faulty logic, every human sexual interaction is incest

it's incredible how dumb a human becomes when they're Atheist, given that we're all created equal

wild sutff

[Anonymous No.23647490]

>>23647438
>according to your faulty logic
Which would be what, exactly? The straw man you ascribed to me lol? How people define and experience what the term incest represents is obviously not based on a 0.1% difference in DNA, but by the fact that both parties came flying out of the same woman (or at the very least with too much familial proximity to the same woman). How you thought this was something non-Christians couldn't understand speaks to your ego and retardation more than it does anything else.

[Anonymous No.23648540]

>>23645502
There were other humans. They were just the first priests in the temple of Eden

[Anonymous No.23648550]

>>23645502
>Literalism
You lost already. NGMI.

[Anonymous No.23648633]

>sin to have sex outside of marriage
Ok makes sense
>sin to have sex within marriage if you do any other position than missionary with the sole purpose of procreation
>can't even pull out
Im going to hell

[Anonymous No.23648704]

>>23645502
GOD is not a male with a Penis, he did not insert his GOD cock into a fleshly woman so as to create Male and Female according to the law of Palingenesis.

So it must be a different type of creation according to different rules, we are not talking about Genes and incest which would imply physical reproduction on the part of God.

[Anonymous No.23649683]

Because incest gives you deformed offspring with several genetic disabilities it’s not rocket science

[Anonymous No.23649700]

>>23645955
Leviticus 20:11-21

[Anonymous No.23651046]

>>23645502
Only the (obsolete) Jewish law forbids incest. If you're not a Jew, you can marry your sister.

[Anonymous No.23651243]

>>23645644
>evolutionary
Fake. Death didn't exist before the fall.

[Anonymous No.23651246]

>>23645502
After the necessity of over it was over it was done purely out of degenerate pleasure, as I'm sure you aware of since you are on 4chan.

[Anonymous No.23651248]

>>23645976
>Adam wasn't the first homo sapien/homo erectus.
Based made-up heresy.

[Anonymous No.23651254]

>>23647293
>you are doing religion wrong
>trust yourself, trust soience, don't trust God
Wow, so this was the real religion all along?

[Anonymous No.23651255]

>>23648550
see >>23651254

[Anonymous No.23651277]

>>23645502
Catholic perspective
>makes one man and one woman
Only Adam is a required belief - Eve's genesis is more of a mystery.It's possible the first human had a soul but interbred non-incestuously with other creatures that didn't have a soul (Neanderthals etc.).
>tells them to be fruitful and multiply
Yes and no. This is read spiritually as meaning sow the Gospel and then literally as make children.
>sends you to hell if you commit incest
God doesn't damn anyone you damn yourself. The Church says marriages cannot be validly given to incestuous marriages and ironically DNA studies show that the human population was never below 1-10K, which ironically means incest was always avoidable and as such the Church was more literally correct than anything.

[Anonymous No.23651296]

>>23651277
>Eve's genesis is more of a mystery
>It's possible the first human had a soul but interbred non-incestuously with other creatures that didn't have a soul
Based fan fiction.

[Anonymous No.23651536]

>>23651296
It's worth saying that if evolution can't accurately say where man is from then religiously inspired science can't either.

[Anonymous No.23651560]

>>23651536
Science by its nature can't ever experience the past but merely interpret facts in the present based on some [usually false and relativistic] view of the world, while we have divine revelation.

[Anonymous No.23651677]

The moral of the bible is that we are God's puppets subject to his will and whims. Free will? Good? Evil? Virtue? Sin? Nothing but a cruel joke.

[Anonymous No.23651684]

>>23651677
>The moral of the bible is that we are God's puppets subject to his will and whims. Free will? Good? Evil? Virtue? Sin? Nothing but a cruel joke.

[Anonymous No.23651710]

>>23651684
That is the only logical conclusion you can draw when you define good as "whatever God wants" and evil as "whatever God doesn't want". Suddenly rape, murder, any atrocity you can think of can be good or bad depending on God's mood that day.

[Anonymous No.23651717]

>>23651710
>you define good as "whatever God wants"
We do not define it like this. Good is an attribute/energy of God. It's eternal and immutable, but God's will in regards to creation can change.

[Anonymous No.23651734]

>>23651710
And then you have an omnipotent omniscient being who constantly intervenes in earthly affairs whenever something is undesirable to him.
God pretends to be surprised that Adam and Eve ate of the fruit, or that Cain killed his brother, except that he couldn't really be surprised when he already knew that was going to happen....
What is the point of hardening Pharaoh's heart so he could have an excuse to send horrible plagues on the Egyptians?
It all boils down to the fact that God uses us just as a child would play with toys for fun.

[Anonymous No.23651740]

>>23651734
>What is the point of hardening Pharaoh's heart so he could have an excuse to send horrible plagues on the Egyptians?
I hope you are under 18, otherwise this display of your ignorance is inexcusable. Try rereading the passages again, or should I say try reading them for the first time instead of gaining your information from R*ddit.

[Anonymous No.23651744]

>>23651717
So if god says bad is good, then you'll go on a rape murder spree? Nice to know.

[Anonymous No.23651747]

>>23651744
>if god says bad is good
This is a false premise.

[Anonymous No.23651759]

>>23651740
Please feel free to correct me and show me what mistake I made.

[Anonymous No.23651765]

>>23649683
God could've just made it so it wouldn't

[Anonymous No.23651769]

>>23651759
Read the text and explain why you think it means what you think it means and then we can discuss it further.

[Anonymous No.23651770]

>>23651747
So god is all that is good, and all that is good is god, and this can never change?

[Anonymous No.23651780]

>>23651740
He makes a fair point, you are just unable to refute it, that is why you are throwing this hissyfit

[Anonymous No.23651783]

>>23651770
Good is an eternal and uncreated attribute of God.
Creation can also participate in this uncreated property, this is called participating in God's grace or theosis.
Anything is good only insofar as it participates in God's goodness.

>>23651780
It's only fair if you do not read the passage but a reddit abridged version. If he can do what I asked there then we can discuss it: >>23651769

[Anonymous No.23651790]

>>23651769
>7 Then the Lord said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet. 2 You are to say everything I command you, and your brother Aaron is to tell Pharaoh to let the Israelites go out of his country. 3 But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in Egypt, 4 he will not listen to you. Then I will lay my hand on Egypt and with mighty acts of judgment I will bring out my divisions, my people the Israelites. 5 And the Egyptians will know that I am the Lord when I stretch out my hand against Egypt and bring the Israelites out of it.”
I interpret it literally, I suppose you will say it is a metaphor and that I am a fool for taking it literally, when right now there are Christian denominations that advocate literal approaches and other denominations that advocate metaphorical ones and neither can say why their interpretation is the only correct one.

[Anonymous No.23651794]

>>23651783
Is evil also an attribute of god? Because god does objectively evil things in the bible, like murdering people for not obeying every single instruction he gives them, when he could just as easily not have murdered them.

[Anonymous No.23651807]

>>23651790
Except that even in Christian denominations that defend more metaphorical interpretations of the Bible they defend that some verses should be taken literally (Jesus miracles and resurrection for example).
So the question is why X passage is literal but Y passage is not.

[Anonymous No.23651818]

>>23651790
>12 After Moses and Aaron left Pharaoh, Moses cried out to the Lord about the frogs he had brought on Pharaoh. 13 And the Lord did what Moses asked. The frogs died in the houses, in the courtyards and in the fields. 14 They were piled into heaps, and the land reeked of them. 15 But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron, just as the Lord had said.
Read the next book too.
>I interpret it literally
Interpreting Scripture is also a part of divine revelation that was given to the apostles and transmitted to their sucessors. It's literal, but not in the way you think because you have a false understanding of free will and how it relates to God.
>"So, evil people have thoughts that are not in their power, but they find in them what their own vices have already done to them out of their desire. Therefore, we need to think about whether it is possible to understand the words: I will harden, in the meaning: "I will show how hardened it is." - St. Augustine

>>23651794
There is no notion of good detached from God. God is not bound by your notion of what is good. He can end lives as He pleases (to bring about good even from human evil in His divine providence) because everything besides your will belongs to God already. Physical death is not some form of non-existence, but a separation of body from soul. Everyone who died before Christ had the chance to hear the Gospel when Christ preached in Hades too, so it might even be better for them.
>when he could just as easily not have murdered them
This only speaks to you imposing your views on God. Why should He consider it when He has full knowledge about the dispositions of those humans?

>>23651807
Because we know from Jesus Christ Himself how to read the Scriptures. It's not a free for all. The Holy Spirit reminds the Church of everything He taught.
>Then He said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?” 27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

[Anonymous No.23651835]

>>23651818
Ok, so I guess you are Catholic and I guess all other Christians are stupid because they don't understand the Bible like you do.

[Anonymous No.23651838]

>>23651818
So good is absolute and unchanging, according to your previous posts. But good is also literally whatever god does, whatever god does is good because he is good. When god murders it is good, when you murder it is bad. This is clown logic.

[Anonymous No.23651842]

>>23651818
So raping children is good and christian, got it.

[Anonymous No.23651852]

>>23651838
Christians defend that might makes right, but they don't want to admit it.

[Anonymous No.23651924]

>>23651835
I'm Orthodox. It's not a question of stupidity, but them not choosing to follow revelation which is historically accepted by the entire Church, instead they chose to made-up modernistic interpretations.

>>23651838
Murder is by definition unlawfully taking someone's life, and God has at times commanded His people to destroy nations that He deemed worthy of not existing anymore. Taking a life in itself is not bad, but unlawfully doing so is because you usurp God's role as the judge.
>clown logic
No, rather your understanding of things and the attempt at imposing your own (subjective) morality (which doesn't even exist outside of God) to judge God is clownish.

>>23651842
I thought this was a good faith discussion.

>>23651852
God's might yes, but not human prideful might.

[Anonymous No.23652064]

>>23651924
>I'm Orthodox. It's not a question of stupidity, but them not choosing to follow revelation which is historically accepted by the entire Church, instead they chose to made-up modernistic interpretations.
So you agree that God made everything in literally 7 days and that all the claims in the Bible are scientifically true?

[Anonymous No.23652080]

>>23652064
>God made everything in literally 7 days
Yes.
>all the claims in the Bible are scientifically true
Depends on what you mean by this. They are absolutely true, the discrepancies with modern science are caused by false assumptions in the atheistic framework.

[Anonymous No.23652101]

>>23652080
What I mean is than when you read...
>Joshua 10:12-14 On the day the Lord gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the Lord in the presence of Israel:
“Sun, stand still over Gibeon,
and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon.”
So the sun stood still,
and the moon stopped,
till the nation avenged itself on its enemies,
as it is written in the Book of Jashar.
The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day. There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the Lord listened to a human being. Surely the Lord was fighting for Israel!

...you think this is what literally happened?

[Anonymous No.23652112]

>>23652101
>>...you think this is what literally happened?
Yes. There is no notion of "scientific law" detached from God's providence and control over creation, miracles are just God choosing to act in a way that he usually does not.

[Anonymous No.23652163]

>>23652112
So God made the sun stand still?

[Anonymous No.23652207]

>>23652163
>duuuhhrr so you think God really did this impossible thing?
Yes, they do. What do you think a miracle is if not something that defies all understanding of the physical world? If God as they describe it is real then making the sun stand still (as well as a host of other things) is well within his capacity to do. Questioning the validity of the miraculous act is pointless because if God exists then it's possible. The focus should be on the latter.

[Anonymous No.23652228]

>>23652163
Yes. Pretty much what >>23652207 said is correct. Trying to find contradictions in the Bible and debate that with us is silly, because you already believe it's uninspired and we claim that you don't understand how to interpret it, nor do you have a non-adhoc way of interpreting it because you don't believe it's one whole but disparate books that should be viewed through whatever limited and subject to change scientific lense you adopted. Rather as an atheist you should try to show some other "truth" that exists and contradicts the Bible.

[Anonymous No.23652252]

>>23652207
So, did the sun orbit around the earth in ancient times or does the sun still do so and we are under an illusion made by the devil like dinosaur fossils?

[Anonymous No.23652268]

>>23652228
What is the interpretation of this verse?
>5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, 8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.

[Anonymous No.23652631]

>>23645502
incest was banned because humans have become degraded due to their fall (caused by their sin). and there were already plenty of non-sisters at that time to mate with so no banning incest doesn't conflict with fruitfulness.
back when it was one man and one woman, human bodies were perfect (no ageing, no dna damage, etc). so incest wouldn't have introduced problems into subsequent generations.
you can plot the lifespan curve and see how it exponentially decays from Adam to future generations.

[Anonymous No.23652637]

>>23646204
>my small 100iq midwit brain can't make sense of concept therefore said concept doesn't make sense objectively

[Anonymous No.23652639]

>>23652252
it's called a Sunrise for a reason, anon
wake up

[Anonymous No.23652646]

>>23652268
the verse means what it says
God is an effective communicator, if you need God's words to be interpreted to you, then how much moreso will you need the 'interpretation' interpreted to you.
and we do see this happening; atheist are literally losing their ability for language.

[Anonymous No.23652672]

>>23652646
Ok how many slaves should I own?