Question for Christians

Post Reply New Topic

True, but consider the following bible quote:

"GE 1:28 Be fruitful and multiply. Fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over all living things."

This kind of states that you should be heterosexual.

Paul's words were written after Genesis, therefore they are modifications upon it.

True that was the way God wanted it in a relationship between Adam and Eve. Plus they were the only people living at the time. It was a mere suggestion that God wanted the human race to go on.

Pardon me for saying so, but isn't that an incredibly grudging and miserable view of one of the great joys of human life? 'Get married if you absolutely must because at least it'll stop you screwing around....' (This used to be in the marriage service - about the purpose of marriage, apart from children and companionship, being 'to avoid fornication' - but they're now changed it to something far more positive. I'd rather they were honest than pretend they've always liked sex just to keep up with the rest of society, because they clearly haven't.)

Judaism has the definite edge here - while it regarded sex as being aimed at fertility, it did (to judge from the Song of Solomon) at least recognize that it was incredibly pleasurable and that that was OK. Also, Judaism has never had a tradition of celibacy. While anyone should have the choice of being asexual if they want to, they have no right to tell people who do have and enjoy sex how to behave. That would be like me, as a childfree person, telling someone how to raise their kids. Or someone on Atkins talking about chocolate cake. You're never going to get a balanced viewpoint.

The question is, at what point that would need to stop, or if there would be a need to stop, and why Adam and Eve would need to multiply in the first place? Given that they were originally conceived to be inmortal.

God told them they could do it and they did.

They fell into sin which killed them spiritually.

The point at which to stop? When the earth is "filled" and subdued by humankind.

The Christian religion is amazing, you can make it say whatever you want. Almost every passage in the bible can be read to contradict another passage - so you can read it however you want. You can even debate the authenticity of the bible itself given that the books of Judas and Mary Magdalene (and about 40 others) were excised from it years ago.

Then there's the layer of religion dropped on it from the pope (if you're Catholic), the Queen if you're Church of England or any evangelist you feel like believing if you're Born-Again.

You can apply your twisted morality any way you want. (For example; there are Autistic babies made in God's image, so maybe he's autistic). Much of the old testament makes it clear that it's perfectly find to murder heathen or bad people (or misbehaving wives).

Personally, I wonder if Disney got it right? Maybe we need to be listening to our built-in Jimmy Crickets? (Conscience). Of course, the conscience of a sociopath is somewhat different from the conscious of other members of our society.

One thing you can always do is making a better being than god, for example, I just imagined a being called Shadow, he is a demonical, a being of immense power that makes god look like a sissy, however, if I gave god a larger handicap, say, make him not exist, yet still let him create the universe, then that it makes him infinitely more powerful than Shadow and therefor makes him omnipotent, of course, in the process he removed himself from existence
But thats the thing, unless god doesn't exist, you can always make something better, something smarter, there are far too many flaws with religion for it to be true, after all, each religion thinks they are correct, it just depends which one manages to burn its ideals into your feable human mind first, usually when you are a child

Ah, the other question,



Unless they had eaten of the tree of life, which in my opinion could be a telomerase gene activator or something to that effect, then they wouldn't be immortal. They lived as long as they did, possibly, due to the lack of malevolent strains of microbes (i.e. disease) and probably to having been created with all their cells having the telomeres, end cap genes, maximized.

Even if they were to live to the present day, they'd still need more than themselves to have dominion over the world. One man and woman can run a small farm, but for creation of aqueducts, roads, management of wildlife, etc, you'd need more than one couple.

That's what I'd think anyway.

christianity is cool for inspiration I find...
its the worlds best written fantasy novel

iamnotaparakeet: Are you aware that cancer cells are immortal? In fact, they are the only kind of eukaryotic cells that can reproduce without limit. Trouble is, they will DESTROY any organism which develops them. True immortality is physically and biochemically impossible. Cells suffer oxidative damage as byproduct of metabolism and its impossible to completely eliminate every single last free oxygen radical in the body. Whats more is that DNA replication and repair is not immune to damage as a result of molecular entropy. Since bodies are growing, cells that wear out due to oxidative damage are quickly replaced. But if growth were to continue the result would be terminal cancer and humans would never make it to the age of 40.
THAT is the real reason why we reproduce! Since an individual organisms cannot last indefinitely they must make another organism like them to ensure the survival of those genes.

You cannot generalize completely from past experience. Life is continuously innovating and cancers result from this random innovation. Cancer is obviously a bad mistake but all mutation is a mistake and, rarely, a mistake results in something novel and very useful.
Immortality is not impossible, merely something not yet attained.

Unfortunately Sand, that is scientifically incorrect. Cancer isnt so much of a mistake as much as it is a byproduct of Telomerase activity. Like I said, DNA replication/rapair is ALSO subject to Entropy and in the case of controlled mitosis(as opposed to cancer)bits of DNA eventually start to get dropped and deleterious mutations accumulate. You also arent taking oxidative damage into account which does eventually interfere with DNA replication in a destructive way. Oxidative damage CANNOT BE AVOIDED BECAUSE IT IS A BYPRODUCT OF METABOLISM. It may be possible to greatly prolong human life, but the closest that life can ever come to true immortality is cancer.

Ah but again in scientific terms it is a form of genetic mistake, for example, if my genes were blasted with gamma rays (which I would thoroughly enjoy ) and one mutated, say it was a telomerase controller, then it forces more cellular growth, in the process becoming cancerous, do you see how at the same time what you say is not a mutation can be? I am sure there are many other not mutative methods but radiation for example does cause genetic mistakes due to ionising radiation, so it really does depend - So to sum it up, you must remember radiation ;D

You're missing the point SamAckery . Genetic errors are 100% guaranteed if an organism lives sufficient long! If they dont come from ionizing radiation exposure they will be caused by oxidative damage! I used to think(as did many scientists) that its our genes that kill us but the fact of the matter is that entropy, a pervasive and ceaseless "force" of the universe, does not permit a highly ordered system to remain ordered eternally.