brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Bob LeChevalier lojbab at lojban.org
Sat Aug 24 16:07:55 EST 2002


"John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
>Eve was deceived by "Nachash", who was a person, not a snake.  The
>description of this person as a snake was a figure of speech then just as it
>is today:  i.e., "he's a real snake".

If some of the Bible is figurative, then all of it could be, and it
can mean damn near anything someone wants it to mean.

>Nachash's deception was to convince Eve that he was "the LORD".

The Bible does not say that he claimed to be "the LORD".

>Gen 4:1  And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bore Cain, and
>said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

You keep trying to ignore the first 6 words of the sentence in that
verse.  Adam was the father; this is the exact same wording used in
4:25.

>Gen 4:2  And she again bore his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of
>sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
>
>Gen 4:25  And Adam knew his wife again; and she bore a son, and called his
>name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of
>Abel, whom Cain slew.
>
>Note the very important difference between the way the conception of Cain
>and the conceptions of Abel and Seth are described.

Not different at all.  The difference is in the name that she chose.
The word Cain was derived from the word meaning "gotten".

And having made me look up in Strong's, we find that the word has two
uses in the Bible.

>1. eldest son of Adam and Eve and the first murderer having murdered
> his brother Abel n pr gent Kenite = "smiths" 
>2. the tribe from which the father-in-law of Moses was a member and
> which lived in the area between southern Palestine and the mountains
> of Sinai 

So by the logic you have been using that names always indicate
descent, Moses married a descendant of Cain, and hence was not an
Israelite, and thus your whole fictional edifice falls apart.

>Cain was from "the LORD", and thus never appears in Adam's genealogy.

Cain doesn't appear in the genealogy because his genealogy was not
considered important to the people of the Old Testament.  If they had
listed the complete genealogy, by the 4th or 5th generation, the
entire book would have been full.  They don't list the other sons and
daughters of Adam either, merely that he had other sons and daughters
(Gen. 5:4)

>Both Abel and Seth were conceived by Adam and do appear in his genealogy.

Abel does not appear in the genealogy in Genesis 5

>Who is "the LORD"?  Certainly not God, who is always referred to as "the
>LORD God".

Every instance in Genesis 4, and several others in Genesis, use just
"the LORD" (Strongs H3068) without "God". If you assert that this was
instead referring to Satan, then you get a most peculiar Bible story.

>These are two different entities.

So you are asserting that there is some other reference in the Bible
for Yahweh/Jehovah besides God?

>The jews claim to be descendants of the Canaanites,

They claim to be the descendants of Abraham.

>Not all races of the world are descendants of Adam.

The Bible does not support this claim, and 264 million Christians
think that you are wrong about this.

> Only the White Race is.

The Bible says nothing to suggest that the descendants of Adam are of
any particular skin color.

>Noah is also their ancestor,

In which case they are also descended from Adam, because Noah is
descended from Adam, and your statement that "only the White Race is"
is a lie.  Gen 5:29,32

>The key point here is that descendants of
>Adam are not descendants of Nachash, descendants of Seth [read: the Hebrews
>and Israelites] are not descendants of Ham, Canaan, Cush, nor Ashkenaz, and
>that any children of any Israelite who ever married any of these
>non-Israelites were never considered to be Israelites, by Israelite law.

There was no "Israelite law" before Moses.  But if there was, then if
Noah's child was a descendant of Cain, then Noah or one of his
ancestors must have broken that law.

The easier solution for you is to admit that Canaan and Cain have no
significant relationship.

>It's impossible [read: illegal]

Those two words do not mean the same thing, nincompoop.  Use the word
that you mean.  Humans do lots of things against the law.  We are
sinners by nature according to the Bible.

>Is there any way that Abraham could be a "jewish patriarch", as the jews
>claim?  No.  The genetic link to Abraham of  the less 2% of the jews in the
>world who MAY be descendants of Abraham is now down to less than one part in
>10^40, and the other 98% of the jews aren't genetically linked to Abraham at
>all.

There is no more chance that YOU are a descendant of Abraham, and
probably less.  You are more of a mongrel than any Jew.

lojbab



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list