Nicest Husband usually does this for me each year; but, this year, he’s traveling. This means that, tomorrow, *I* will have to step up to the plate and take Sweet Pea to our annual 4th of July parade. Not only am I a total stick-in-the-mud when it comes to parades; last year, the local evangelicals were out in force, approaching my (10-year-old) daughter with event invitations – and candy! – every time my husband’s head was turned. After hearing about it when they returned home, I even shot off a short post, God Bless the 4th of July!, which included pictures of all the crap treats that my daughter received. In other words, Not. Looking. Forward. To. Tomorrow. Wish me luck? …Or, given my feelings about people who engage in what I call, “Have you seen my puppy evangelism?,” maybe you’d like to wish *them* luck ;)
Posted in Christianity, evangelism, holidays, religion, religious word play, skepticism | 3 Comments »

- When Genesis 4:17 reports that, “And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch,” we cannot assume that it was Eve that bore Cain’s child. Given their long lifespans (Adam lived for 930 years, as you recall from Genesis 5:5), Eve had many years to produce a daughter/sex partner for Cain. In fact, all of the best scholarship on this matter points to a likely brother-sister pairing.
- Incest was not only permissable, at one time; it was God’s Plan to grow his family. It was only later, in the time of Moses, that God prohibited the practice (Leviticus 18).
None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness: I am the Lord. The nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother you shall not uncover. She is your mother; you shall not uncover her nakedness. The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. The nakedness of your sister, the daughter of your father, or the daughter of your mother, whether born at home or elsewhere, their nakedness…
(See Leviticus 18:7- for more, as this goes on for quite some time. Basically, nakedness = bad.)
Now, I know what you’re thinking: That’s not possible. God’s Truths are timeless and unchanging. His requirements of us do not bend to the times, like the corrupt “situational ethics” of mealy-mouthed, values-neutral liberals. God’s Truths remain constant over time: What is wrong is wrong today - just as it was yesterday – and will be tomorrow.
Instead, the trick to thinking about Cain’s wife is flexibility

and what I call religious word play - in this case, with the word, “bad.”
You may associate “bad” with the following synomyns:
depraved, corrupt, base, sinful, criminal, atrocious
Sure, “bad” may be used in this way when describing, oh, homosexuals, for instance; but, when it comes to describing First Family incest, you’ll need to rethink the word. It’s sorta like redefining the word “is.”

It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.
You see, in the case of the brother-sister sex predestined by God, the idea was a fine one (”very good” even); it was only later, post-Fall, that incest became bad-unhealthy.
The following account (accepted by many fundamentalists) explains how it all went down:
Now it is true that children produced in a union between brother and sister have a greater chance to be deformed. As a matter of fact, the closer the couple are in relationship, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed. It is very easy to understand this without going into all the technical details.
Each person inherits a set of genes from his or her mother and father. Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways.
However, this fact of present-day life did not apply to Adam and Eve. When the first two people were created, they were perfect. Everything God made was “very good” (Genesis 1:31). That means their genes were perfect—no mistakes. But when sin entered the world because of Adam (Genesis 3:6), God cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate, that is, suffer death and decay (Romans 8:22). Over a long period of time, this degeneration would have resulted in all sorts of mistakes occurring in the genetic material of living things.
But Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He, as well as his brothers and sisters, would have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam or Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with. In that situation, brother and sister could have married (provided it was one man for one woman, which is what marriage is all about, Matthew 19:4–6) without any potential to produce deformed offspring.
By the time of Moses (about 2,500 years later), degenerative mistakes would have accumulated to such an extent in the human race that it would have been necessary for God to bring in the laws forbidding brother-sister (and close relative) marriage (Leviticus 18–20).

- The evolution of incest
I’m opposed to the redefinition of a 5,000-year-old definition of marriage. I’m opposed to having a brother and sister be together and call that marriage.
Boy, his calculations are way off. Good thing Pastor Rick is such an adorable lug, because he’s not much of a mathematician.

Anyhoo, here it is in a nutshell:
Though Adam and Eve were capital-P Perfect, their human genetic code was corrupted following the Fall; since that time, genetic defects have been multiplied, amplified, and passed down from generation to generation, making it necessary for God to finally declare incest close intermarriage bad-unhealthy.
Ken Ham’s parting challenge to evolutionists on the matter:
You see, if evolution is true, science has an even bigger problem than Cain’s wife to explain—namely, how could man ever evolve by mutations (mistakes) in the first place, since that process would have made everyone’s children deformed? The mere fact that people can produce offspring that are not largely deformed is a testimony to creation, not evolution.

Related posts:
Posted in Christianity, Rick Warren, bible, blogging, creationism, evangelism, fundamentalism, history, huh?, math, religion, religious word play, science, sex, skepticism, snark | 26 Comments »
You’re familiar with this question, right? If Adam and Eve were the first man and woman, who did son, Cain, “marry” in order to go on to populate an entire city? Bible literalists don’t like to come right out and suggest the obvious: incest (who can blame them?), but (bless their hearts) they do their best.
Impressive. At 1:50 (in the video) we’re told that there are “seven biblical answers for where she came from”; all we gotta do is go to the website to get ‘em.
So, I went there — and, here’s what I found:
The Bible Plumb Line: Cain’s Wife and Other Perspectives.
Have you ever heard the question, “Where did Cain’s Wife come from?” Did you realize there are more than NINE Biblical answers? Did you realize that many questions of the lost come from only the first 9 chapters of the Bible (Creation to the Flood)?
Price : $25.00
That’s right. You gotta buy ‘em. To hear the biblical answers, you’ll need 25 buckaroos. Maybe that’s a good price — especially as it seems that they’ve figgered out two extra answers since they made the video. Now there are “NINE” biblical answers! I dunno. Maybe 25 dollars for nine biblical answers is a good deal.
So, like me, you’ll probably want to go fer it and add the book to your shopping cart. That’s when you’ll get a more detailed product description:
This book is written from the standpoint that the Bible is absolutely accurate in all respects, and there is not a “need” to argue scientific or “lost” objections. The focus of much of this book is to demonstrate how to “dis-arm” the nay-sayer so that those with an evangelical call can return to their message….
It gives several (More than 5) potential sources for Cain’s wife, and instructs the reader on the easiest response, and the most “mind-stretching” responses, all having a potential for truth.
Dang! Now, there’s “more than 5″ answers. I spose I’ll think on this for awhile and, hopefully, by the time my Seven – or NINE – or more than 5 – answers git here, my mind’ll be plenty stretched to receive potential truth.
Posted in Christianity, bible, creationism, evangelism, fundamentalism, history, humor, religion, religious word play, sex | 53 Comments »
My goodness, this story just keeps getting bigger. By now, you’ve probably heard that President Obama murdered a helpless fly during a news interview this week (I’ve got the video, in case you haven’t seen it yet).
And, you may even know that PETA released a statement expressing disappointment with the President’s actions:
He isn’t the Buddha, he’s a human being and human beings have a long way to go before they think before they act. [sic]
The group even gave him a Katcha Bug (a device which traps bugs and allows their safe release back into nature) to get Obama to change his ways; but,… just as the scandal seems to be winding down, this story has emerged! Oh, my. Can you imaging how the PETA people are going to react when they find out about it?
Posted in Obama, humor | 4 Comments »
For those of you trekking around South Florida, keep your eyes open for your state’s first atheist billboard!

Disclaimer: This information is publicly available. Lynn of boremetotears is not liable for eye injuries sustained by persons engaged in the inherently dangerous activity of viewing the strikingly tasteless atheist billboard without requisite protective eye-wear. The viewer bears all responsibility.
_______________________________
signature / date

It goes up June 22nd and will remain up for one month — unless people chip in enough money to keep it up longer. It will be located “on Sunrise Blvd. facing the west (east bound) between the Swap Shop and I-95.”
See FreethoughtFlorida for more info.
HT: Friendly Atheist
Posted in atheism, evangelism, skepticism | 12 Comments »
SG (Sweetest Girl) has a friend who speaks text. The two will be having a perfectly normal conversation when, out of the blue, GF (Girl’s Friend) will say “oh-em-gee” (OMG – Oh My God)… or “I gotta go, I’ll bee-ar-bee” (BRB – Be Right Back).
SG: Why do people do that when it takes the same amount of time to just say the words?
Me: I don’t know.
SG: It’s annoying.
[pause]
SG: How would you say R-O-F-L as a word?
Me: “Rofle”? “Roffle”? It could be ”roffle.” [smile]
Girl: [smiles back]
Me: Y’know what? From now on, whenever one of us says somthing funny, instead of laughing, the other person should say, “roffle.”
SG: [roffling at VDM - Very Dorky Mom]
SG: And, how would we say the M-A-O (My A** Off) at the end of roffle?
Me: Maybe “moww” like Mao Tse-Tung… Mao Tse-Tung was a Chinese dictator.
SG: [totally roffling now] - His name was “mousy tongue???” Really??
Me: [totally roffling now 2]

Posted in humor, world of kids | 13 Comments »


