By Dan Merica and Eric Marrapodi, CNN
Washington (CNN) – Florida Sen. Marco Rubio attempted to walk the line between science and faith-based creationism in remarks that that have provoked the ire of liberal blogs, leaving the door open to creationism in responding to a recent question about the age of the Earth.
When GQ’s Michal Hainey asked Rubio, in an interview released Monday, “How old do you think the Earth is,” the rising Republican star described the debate about the planet’s age as “one of the great mysteries.”
“I'm not a scientist, man,” Rubio told the interviewer. “I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States.”
“Whether the Earth was created in seven days, or seven actual eras,” Rubio continued, “I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.”
Most scientists agree that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old and the universe is 14.5 billion years old. Christian Young Earth Creationists, on the other hand, argue that the weeklong account of God creating the Earth and everything in it represents six 24-hour periods (plus one day of rest) and date the age of the Earth between 6,000 and 10,000 years.
Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter
Left-leaning blogs and sites like ThinkProgress and Huffington Post jumped on Rubio’s comments, with the Zack Beauchamp from ThingProgress writing, “To suggest we can’t know how old the Earth is, then, is to deny the validity of these scientific methods altogether — a maneuver familiar to Rubio, who also denies the reality of anthropogenic climate change.”
Rubio is regarded as a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2016, though the senator says his visit last week to Iowa, home of the first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses, had “nothing to do with 2016.”
His response to GQ’s age of the Earth query has also provoked questions about his political aspirations. Dave Weigel of Slate writes, “How can you read that and not think ‘Iowa’? ” The state is the first to hold a presidential caucus in 2016.
Forty-six percent of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years, according to a survey released by Gallup in June. That number has remained unchanged for the past 30 years, since 1982, when Gallup first asked the question on creationism versus evolution.
CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories
The second most common view is that humans evolved with God's guidance - a view held by 32% of respondents. The view that humans evolved with no guidance from God was held by 15% of respondents.
The Gallup poll has not specifically asked about views on the age of the Earth.
Rubio attends a Baptist church in southern Florida but also considers himself “a practicing Catholic.”
He was born Catholic, but his family converted to Mormonism when Rubio was 8 years old, according to Rubio’s recent memoir. The family left its LDS faith behind when it moved from Nevada back to Florida and Rubio was confirmed in the Catholic Church.
Catholic teaching is that science and faith are not at odds with one another and it is possible to believe what scientists say about the Earth’s age and in God. But many evangelical churches, including Baptist ones, promote a version of creationism.
When CNN reached out to Rubio’s Baptist church in Florida on Monday, a person answering the phone would not comment on its teachings about the Earth’s age and said that a church representative was unlikely to be available in the near term.
During the GQ interview, Rubio argued that “there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all.”
For the past 30 years, the “equal-time argument” –- the idea that Creationism taught alongside evolution -– has been popular method for Creationists to advance their cause. In the late 1980s, some state legislatures passed bills that promoted the idea of a balanced treatment of both ideas in the classroom.
In 1987, the issue made it all the way to the Supreme Court, where a Louisiana "equal-time law" was struck down. The court ruled that teaching creationism in public school classrooms was a violation of the Establishment Cause in the Constitution, which is commonly referred to as the separation of church and state.
Me? I'm laughing at the little troll who's so threatened but is such a wuss that he won't use his own screen name. What a baby. Repeat 1.
I think tea patriot should bury the hatchet with everyone. Why dont we all just be friends?
What are you doing, Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son?
it's not really tom tom the pipers son – this is someone who wants to control the thread. someone who's angry and cranky and feels a need to disrupt. they don't like the things being written... it's quite possibly someone who has been bludgeoned by tom tom the pipers son.
this is the only way they can strike out,
it's a weak tactic used by the vanquished. fortunately it doesn't work very well.
cha cha cha
Me? I'm laughing at the little troll who's so threatened but is such a wuss that he won't use his own screen name. What a baby.
it means you win, (real) tom.
winning is awesome.
Well, it would be if I weren't having a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent like Brophy/Who invited me/herbie/?/Clown question.
ya know tom.. bludgeoning the enemies of reason may very well be like taking candy from a baby... but it's still important and for a good cause.
tolerance of religious idiocy has to end – enough is blah blah blah
I suppose you are right. But why are they all so stupid?
why are they all so stupid???
i think that's a very good question – but i don't believe there's enough room on all the forums of all the websites to even approach the subject with anything meaningful.
i will offer this:
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein
Love the quote.
Although I would like to say, that tolerance of religious ideas should be given, but only when they abide by the secular principals of this country, and they give tolerance. We don't have to respect the ideas, but we should give tolerance within reason, as is the foundation of our country.
i believe people should be free to believe in whatever imaginary men in the sky they choose. what i disagree with – is when people who suffer from delusional thinking attempt to legislate their theistic morals onto the rest of society – depriving people of their freedom, rights, liberty and equality.
this is why i urge everyone to sign the p e t i t i o n at t h e p e t i t i o n s i t e . org to remove rubio from the house committee on commerce, science, and transportation AND sign the p e t i t i o n s to remove todd akin and paul broun from the house committee on science, space and technology.
also – i want to encourage people to donate to and support the freedom from religion foundation.
you can make a difference.
i was clear... tolerance of religious idiocy has to end.
Ah I see.
i gotta say.. and i wouldn't be doing my job if i didn't.......
it's be just super with me if there was a complete and total cessation of all tolerance for religious ideas... heh...
for now – i'll settle with an end to tolerance of religious idiocy.
also – i'd like to publicly thank the powers that be at cnn who were courteous enough to remove the spam that was posted earlier.
I don't like that CNN uses the word "debate" in the ti.tle of this article. A debate implies two sides with reasonable, but differing, opinions both of whom can make a logical argument for there position supported by evidence. This is absolutely not the case concerning young earth creationism. There is zero evidence to support the Idea that the earth is between six and ten thousand years old. This is not a debate. This is a group of religious extremest screaming that their creation myth should be taught as science. If this is going to be called a debate then, we should also be having a debate on weather or not NASA actually landed on the moon, or weather or not Big Foot exists.
I love sucking di-ck but dont get any. thats why im so angry
Aww, what's the matter, Brophy? Did I hurt your feeewings?
faux tom, you have something against people who enjoy giving head? what's wrong with you? did uncle phil touch your privates when you were young? or was it reverend jim?
Even the "new scientist" had a cover that said "darwin was wrong, cutting down the tree of life". look it up.
@tea: i still do not understand why all you jesus freaks insist on making darwin the point of your anti-evolution propaganda when he only placed the first stone; hundreds if not thousands of other sciectists have refined and attempted to debunk the progess of evolution along the way and all have failed to.
the evolutionary theory is the best explaination for the diversity of life on the planet earth.
some magical creator isn't needed when you look at the basics of life.............try to eat but not get eaten.
trying to avoid being eaten makes animals move, the ones that are faster or smarter live to pass on their genetics......the others die out.
Darwin's hypothesis was that black people were less evolved the Caucasians
Brophy, don't you have school today? Get yer azz in gear and get to class. You're too dumb to miss any chance that you might not continue to live in ignorance.
Tom Tom the piper's son, I have no desire to ever communicate to you. Your obnoxious, you call people names when they disagree with you. I have, and will never have anything to say to you. You are a very foolish person that can't be taken serious
you cu-nt pi-sshead fu-cking ass-hole how dare you
And YOU'RE (not "your", you ignorant yahoo) a troll who has used a dozen screen names to type your tripe here. This is a free site and you don't get to decide who responds to your bullish!t. If you can't take it, then leave.
"Darwin's hypothesis was that black people were less evolved the Caucasians"
He was right. Mexicans were one step below both.
rotfl @ pedro having an extended conversation with tom while proclaiming he won't talk to her anymore. It sounds like Pedro wants nothing more than to keep talking to Tom...
Yeah, poor little Brophy just hates it when he's outed.
Did you even read the article or just the headline? It did not say evolution was found to be false.
You want to discredit science...fine....what alternative to you have that is a better way to determine what is real and not real?
lol, did you even read this article? or just the headline? It doesn't challenge evolution at all.
I check CNN again after I come back from work in the evening. have a good day y'all
If you are just going to ignore honest direct questions again today and then change the subject don't bother.
about the main point in this article, yes so-called evolutionary theory I suspect tell the whole story. I brought up the climate change topic to show how scientists are not to be truested all the time. just google terms like CRU, "east anglia", climategate. Had the hacked emails not been brought out, everything would still be hidden. Anvil@, no the perps have not been punished to date and there is no proof journals have not been packed with an agenda in mind. reason you dont have peer reviewed anti human based climate change research is that it wont get past the gatekeepers.
Just because you decided to abandon the thread where you were thoroughly thrashed for you ridiculous ideas and start shitting in a new spot doesn't make those ideas any more valid.
He changed the subject twice, climate change and abortion.
Is there any reason that you don't know that there were 7 independent investigations into "climategate"? Plus, all 7 reached the exact same conclusions. No fraud. No false data. No anything.
For so e reason you ignorant fundiot nutter deniers never post those facts. I wonder why?
teapatriot – you do not possess the necessary skill set to suspect anything at all about the available data in relation to global climate change or mans effects on it.
on the peer review process:
there's lots of bright people who have worked hard to present scientific research only to have all of its inconsistencies and errors brutally pointed out by their peers and paraded in front of them much like when muslim sava ges drag bodies through the street or hang them from lamp posts.
bad science doesn't survive the peer review process... mistakes and inconsistencies are always suspect, as they stick out like a sore thumb – and you better believe they get noticed...
and most commonly – people who intentionally attempt to inject trash into the process are very quickly detected and weeded out of the process.
you have evidence of this with the whole cru deal.
one of the funniest bits about attempting to throw up climategate is that – the perpetrators (the guys who tried to filter comments from researchers and then take them out of context in order to posit a conspiracy) – were thwarted.
teapatriot, you fail to understand that the people who were shut down were the retards who attempted to misinform the public. people like YOU!
~ha ha ha ha ha ha ha~
you got conned and you bought it. sucker. even after the whole debacle was cleared up – you're still trying to use it as ammunition (for what?) in 2012.
and you can fire back with some malarky about a cover-up... you already did – so i expect it. keep in mind – when you do... it's just more white noise.
we're talking about a large population of scientists from a diverse span of disciplines – and fyi: large bodies of individuals can't keep secrets - and scientists can't wait to find something wrong with the data.
the scientific process is brutal – and it's a world you'll never understand. all the data we have has already passed through the peer review process. lolz
for now you'll have wallow in your own willful ignorance and settle for the work of science which you already take for granted. you probably can't build a television or a computer – much less a resistor or capacitor.... yet you're an expert in changing channels and typing your drivel on the interwebs – and that's as far as your genius goes, champ.
you claimed your eyes were open... but you haven't removed your blinders....
i would implore you to keep those blinders on!!! don't let me or anyone else stop you!!! please – by all means – continue to post! continue to show the world what a abject retard you are. it's fine with me that you and your ilk are the source of so much derisive comedy directed at the usa for other countries across the globe. stick to your guns!!
i like for people to see what tea party people think. i love it when you show yourselves to be ignorant, bigoted and delusional.
dealing with you and those like you is akin to shooting fish in a barrel – but i don't feel bad about it at all – because it's for a good purpose.
and you can continue to blather about evolution, transitional fossils, and irreducible complexity – or abortion and your non-existent ability to "speak for the unborn" – while you're vehement about abandoning that child you'd force into the world – or a n y t h i n g else you care to use to support your weak, indefensible position....
and we'll continue to expose you for the bigoted idiot you've already made yourself out to be. have faith in that.
@EVAN: "But, as my preacher says, it takes a lot of sinners burning in hell to keep God's people warm in Heaven."
1) your "god" i a sick weak little dictator that can't even "forgive his children" without ki11ing his son to himself.
2) your preacher which i knew you permitted to brainwash you, you weak freak, is a sick sadistic ass if he can come up with things like that to say about a place like hell to justify it.
3) you follow your "god" in every way. a scared powerless little child kicking and screaming into the night when you don't get what you want................don't worry you will meet your "god" soon enough.
We got Mr. Rubio sitting here.
Four years from now you, Marco Rubio could be president of this great country of ours. He will be filled with so much joy, that he could be could very well be crying when giving his acceptance speech. His supports will be crying. Everyone will be crying. I will even be crying. Probably not as bad as when I found out that 46% of Americans believe that the earth was created in the last 10,000 years but still crying nonetheless.
If there would be something to cry for, it would be that. The sad thing is that we haven't done enough to change that perception and no politician will do enough to change that. Not Mr. Bush, not Mr. Obama, and it appears neither will you too, Mr. Rubio.
So, Mr. Rubio, how do you plan on handling the issue of Creationism/Evolution? Since we all need evolution for the flu vaccine and sick individuals with diseases such as AIDS need it, it only makes sense that our politicians should step up and make a clear stance in favor of it. However, you seem to have taken the high road.
What's that, Mr. Rubio? Shut up??? That's not the type of response I would expect from a United States Senator.
Ok, I just thought that many of your politicians in DC had the idea of teaching Intelligent Design alongside evolution as if it was accepted by the scientific community.
Plus, you know Charles Darwin is regarded as one the greatest minds of all time. His name is read in text books every year. When he died he was given a state funeral and buried alongside Isaac Newton and John Herschel. He must have been onto something if he was given such recognition.
Uh, What? You know Charles Darwin can't do that to himself, that's physically impossible.
See, I never thought that politicians should go up against science. I think it's time for politicians should support science to its fullest. Science cured polio, put a man on the moon, and gave America the most elite defense equipment that we used to destroy al-qaeda. Why would we turn our back on science in this regard?
What? I can't do that to myself either, Mr. Rubio. You weren't lying when you said you weren't a man of science.
…Wait that is possible? How would one go about doing that? Hold on let me write this down. Uh, huh. And I do what with my left foot?
I just think that as Americans we should be one of the leaders when it comes to something like science. Contrary to what is believed, someone learning that the earth was created in a matter of days is not science. Also, contrary to what is believed, science is not against religion. Many Christian denominations do not think one will burn in hell if they accept that the earth is billions of years old.
Finally, my problem isn't only you Mr. Rubio. You are just one of many politicians in terms of this issue. I wish we would live in a world where science is encouraged to its fullest.
@DX: way funnier than "the empty seat" bit done by clint eastwood. XD
I will repeat for the last time
having s3x leads to possibilty of having child just as planting a seed in the ground leads to possibility of having a plant come out of the ground.
Having a plant in the ground leads to the possibilty we will pull it out before it takes root.
Confucius say ... "Man who stick d!ck in ground, have "piece" on Earth :)
So what, TeaFart? Nobody has to give birth unless she chooses to do so. I repeat, your only input as to this issue is what YOU do. Women have the right to choose whether to continue a pregnancy or to end it. YOU have no say in what they choose to do. If you are interested in preventing unwanted and unplanned pregnancies, then vote for politicians who approve of providing contraception for poor women and never have s#x with a woman unless YOU are wearing a rubber.
Nobody is asking for your advice on the matter. Nobody has to pay attention to your beliefs. Nobody cares what you think.
thankfully, no more posting from teafart, right?
Here is to Tom and his views. No doubt when he is out of his mind and a relative has medical power over him...they will put them out of his misery. Thank goodness it would be no one's business except for those in charge of his body.
Methinks TeaFart is a sore loser and is too embarrassed at the thrashing he got to post under his own name.
By the way, dear, I'm female. And I, like all other women, am in charge of my own body. Try not to trip over your tongue.
One thing I will say is that trina@ has a one sided view of things. which is the PC view today but not reality.
everything has a natural consequence. When you remove natural consequences, then warped behaviour take place which destroy society. Chaos in society can be traced to bad role models which can be traced to easy divorce and amoral s3x which can be traced to easy birth con-trol and ab0rt1on.
By repeating 100 times that I should foster a woman who is about to have an ab0rt1on you dont achieve anything. By ignoring my 2 alalogies, about shoplifting and not preparing for exam. or by falsely claiming I mean s3x is crime which I never did. analogy means A ::B :: C : D which means as B is to A, D is to C. it does not mean A = C
Its not a debate any more just noise.
@teapot: "When you remove natural consequences, then warped behaviour take place which destroy society."
there are only two natural consequences to human behaviour....................
life = human survive dumb decision learns from it and attempts to teach younger generation.
life = (part two) birth of another human.
death = human did not survive dumb mistake
death (part two)...................................hint there is no part two.
@ WASP ... good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement lol :)
Of course you did, TeaFart. You want women to pay the price for having s3x by forcing them to give birth.
Too bad what you want is completely irrelevant. Women are going to do what's best for them and they are the only ones who know what that is.
Why would a woman care about your opinion on what SHE should do? I can't picture ANYONE, male or female, who would even give your opinion on ANY matter any more weight than they would the thoughts of a flea.
"Chaos in society can be traced to bad role models which can be traced to easy divorce and amoral s3x which can be traced to easy birth con-trol and ab0rt1on."
I thought that moron Soldier of Conscience said he wasn't going to post any more. He's a poe.
I read through some of these posts and noticed a lot of you have been referring the bible, so I figured it must be relevant to this discussion. Here are some more words from my favorite book:
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
What would an all-powerful "god" need a son for? COuldn't this "god" of yours do things for itself? Why send in the hired help? Why have any help at all? Guess your "god" isn't all you crack it up to be, is it?
That is a great book, now post the parts with god ordering genocide and murder, regulating slavery and r@pe and condoning incest....those are my favorite.
Cheese, put up or shut up.....post the scriptures you are referring to. By the way, try not to take them out of context if you can help it.
i sense an atheist is going to once again teach a christian his bible...
If you are not aware that all of this is in the bible you have obviously not read it. I will post the passages shortly.
"When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you may nations...then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy." Deuteronomy 7:1-2, NIV.
Exodus 21:20-21 "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money [property]."
Genesis 19: 32-36
Lot gets drunk and fornicates with his daughters (twice). And before you offer up the excuse the bible uses that...."Lot was too drunk to know better" ....ask yourself if that excuse would fly today in a court of law, if not, don't use it here to justify his behavior, and god does not punish him so your god must be ok with drunken incest.
(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)
If a man is caught in the act of r@ping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
This is because in the bible women are property and r@pe is a "property" crime. After the r@pist violates the girl she is no longer worth anything so the perp marries the victim.
Please explain in what "context" slavery, murder, genocide or incest should be justified? The fact that you imply there ever would be a context to do anything but condemn those actions show what a morally bankrupt perspective the Bible and Christianity has fooled you into believing is moralistic.
Cheese, I thought we agreed not to take things out of context?
Let's look at these one by one:
Murder: You know how God feels about Murder but in case you forgot please see below: EXD 20:13
Cheese, do you consider it Murder when Soldiers fight in a just war? The people you referred to in Deuteronomy 7:1-2 were doing some of the worst things in human history. I was not there but from what I have read they were burning babies to death. Should have God allowed people like that to prosper?
If time permits, I will gladly respond to your other posts tomorrow. Shouldn't take too long these are all easy to address.
Exd 20:1 And God spoke all these words, saying,
Exd 20:2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
Exd 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before [fn] me.
Exd 20:4 "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Exd 20:5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me,
Exd 20:6 but showing steadfast love to thousands [fn] of those who love me and keep my commandments.
Exd 20:7 "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain.
Exd 20:8 "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Exd 20:9 Six days you shall labor, and do all your work,
Exd 20:10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates.
Exd 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
Exd 20:12 "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the LORD your God is giving you.
Exd 20:13 "You shall not murder. [fn]
Exd 20:14 "You shall not commit adultery.
Exd 20:15 "You shall not steal.
Exd 20:16 "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
Exd 20:17 "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor's."
Exd 20:18 Now when all the people saw the thunder and the flashes of lightning and the sound of the trumpet and the mountain smoking, the people were afraid [fn] and trembled, and they stood far off
Exd 20:19 and said to Moses, "You speak to us, and we will listen; but do not let God speak to us, lest we die."
Exd 20:20 Moses said to the people, "Do not fear, for God has come to test you, that the fear of him may be before you, that you may not sin."
Exd 20:21 The people stood far off, while Moses drew near to the thick darkness where God was.
Exd 20:22 And the LORD said to Moses, "Thus you shall say to the people of Israel: 'You have seen for yourselves that I have talked with you from heaven.
Exd 20:23 You shall not make gods of silver to be with me, nor shall you make for yourselves gods of gold.
Exd 20:24 An altar of earth you shall make for me and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your peace offerings, your sheep and your oxen. In every place where I cause my name to be remembered I will come to you and bless you.
Exd 20:25 If you make me an altar of stone, you shall not build it of hewn stones, for if you wield your tool on it you profane it.
Exd 20:26 And you shall not go up by steps to my altar, that your nakedness be not exposed on it.'
I will address only your first point because that is all that is needed to prove your argument is BS.
As far as a "just" war goes I am not sure there is such a thing except as self-defense which this is not. And regardless that does not matter because if soldiers go in and kill woman and children and have no mercy, that is not just, it is not moral, there is no excuse for indiscriminate killing of innocents. That is why genocide is ALWAYS wrong, even if your monster of a god demands it. I would refuse, and that makes me (and I bet you) more moral than the bloodthisrty asshat of a god.
Oh and just for kicks, you ignored the fact that your god condons slavery, allowed incest, and regulates r@pe and considers woman property.
BTW...did you notice you just excused genocide? As a "loving" christian doesn't that bother you? And doesn't it bother you you have to defend genocide to an "amoral" atheist? That must really suck....
Cheese, you lost all credibility when you said the Bible is condoning incest and you used Genesis 19: 32-36 to make your case. Do you really need the Bible to say “And that was wrong” every time it records evil? God provided an entire chapter blasting incest, how much more do you need?
Regarding your previous post, God does punish evil and he is qualified to do it.
Here is what God really said about incest: LEV:18
And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, I am the LORD your God.
After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances.
Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein: I [am] the LORD your God.
Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I [am] the LORD.
None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover [their] nakedness: I [am] the LORD.
The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she [is] thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it [is] thy father's nakedness.
The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, [whether she be] born at home, or born abroad, [even] their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.
The nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's daughter, [even] their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs [is] thine own nakedness.
The nakedness of thy father's wife's daughter, begotten of thy father, she [is] thy sister, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's sister: she [is] thy father's near kinswoman.
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister: for she [is] thy mother's near kinswoman.
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's brother, thou shalt not approach to his wife: she [is] thine aunt.
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter in law: she [is] thy son's wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother's wife: it [is] thy brother's nakedness.
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, neither shalt thou take her son's daughter, or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness; [for] they [are] her near kinswomen: it [is] wickedness.
Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister, to vex [her], to uncover her nakedness, beside the other in her life [time].
Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.
Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour's wife, to defile thyself with her.
And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through [the fire] to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I [am] the LORD.
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.
Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it [is] confusion.
Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:
And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.
Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit [any] of these abominations; [neither] any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you:
(For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which [were] before you, and the land is defiled;)
That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that [were] before you.
For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit [them] shall be cut off from among their people.
Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that [ye] commit not [any one] of these abominable customs, which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I [am] the LORD your God.
Don – who did Cain, Abel, and Seth marry? Who did Noah's grandkids marry?
" Do you really need the Bible to say “And that was wrong” every time it records evil? "
Yes...yes I do. And you know why? Because despite all the rules and laws about what is allowed and what is not allowed nowhere in the bible does it say "owning another person" is wrong. You would think it could pass on that little bit of morality just once. The only conclusion is your god does not consider slavery wrong. Especially since yor god Jesus came down here himself and said "slaves obey your masters". It is not a book of morality it is a book of "do what I say not what I do".
I noticed you completely sidestepped the genocide issue. Please explain what kind of loving being orders the killing of an entire race of people? If it is not moral for humans to act in such a way why in the world would it be moral for a god to act in such a way? Your only reponse is to argue that anything god does is moral (Divine Command Theory) and that is false. If god tells me to kill my children, (something your god has done on more than on occasion) that is an immoral command and I will not do it.
Cheese, Sorry I didn't get back to you last night but sometimes life just gets too busy.
I did want to respond to your charges:
Because despite all the rules and laws about what is allowed and what is not allowed nowhere in the bible does it say "owning another person" is wrong. You would think it could pass on that little bit of morality just once.
You asked for God to show disfavor of Slavery just once, well here are several examples. I can post more if you like:
Exd 21:16 "He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.
Lev 25:38 'I [am] the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land of Canaan [and] to be your God.
Lev 25:39 'And if [one of] your brethren [who dwells] by you becomes poor, and sells himself to you, you shall not compel him to serve as a slave.
Lev 25:40 'As a hired servant [and] a sojourner he shall be with you, [and] shall serve you until the Year of Jubilee.
Lev 25:41 'And [then] he shall depart from you–he and his children with him–and shall return to his own family. He shall return to the possession of his fathers.
Lev 25:42 'For they [are] My servants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves.
Act 7:6 And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and entreat [them] evil four hundred years.
Act 7:7 And the nation to whom they shall be in bondage will I judge, said God: and after that shall they come forth, and serve me in this place.
Exd 6:5 And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage; and I have remembered my covenant.
Exd 6:6 Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I [am] the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments:
Exd 6:7 And I will take you to me for a people, and I will be to you a God: and ye shall know that I [am] the LORD your God, which bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians.
Why people felt the need to and were permitted to have slaves I do not pretend to know. From what I have read, some people in those days would become slaves as a result of not paying their debts or as a result of war.
Like I said, I do not pretend to be an expert on how people became slaves but you can clearly see from these scriptures that the Bible did not take the subject lightly.
I thought I had already responded to you regarding the topic of what you called "Murder" in previous posts.
I understand that you have a problem dealing with the severity of God's wrath on evil, it is not a pleasant. If people spit in the eye of God they do it at their own risk, but if they choose to repent then God offers forgiveness.
I read through some of these posts and noticed a lot of you have been referring the bible, so I figured it must be relevant to this discussion. Here are some words from my favorite book:
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
And God saw the light, that [it was] good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
and you really think that really happened????
Except, of course, that the earth was not created "in the beginning". The earth didn't form until 9,000,000,000 years had passed after the singularity began expanding.
Your god was so scientifically ignorant that he fucked up the very first verse in his book.
Primewonk, are you sure you want to stick 9,000,000,000 years? Since we are just making things up here why not go with a big number like 999,000,000,000 years?
awww, ain't that charming? somebody let li'l baby donnie out to play. here are some crayons, honey, we don't want you to poke an eye out, you dear, sweet, precious li'l baby.
ER, It sounds like your brain is beginning to shut down now, maybe you should hit the call bell again and ask the nurse to bring you your meds. Once you do that then you can talk with the adults again, but in the meantime stop making a fool of yourself.
It sounds like your brain is beginning to shut down now, maybe you should hit the call bell again and ask the nurse to bring you your meds. Once you do that then you can talk with the adults again, but in the meantime stop making a fool of yourself.
Don, the only one who's "making things up" and looking "foolish" is you.
Oh no, now I made Piper cry again.
How can you make me "cry again" when you didn't make me cry the first time, you chucklehead?
How friggin' stupid ARE you?
Piper, calm down I am sure your dog still loves you. Now go dry your eyes.
I'm sure your kids think you're a complete loser. Go wipe your ass.
Piper, your wife is nuts about me that is all that really matters.
Well, Donny, that's interesting, since I'm female and married to the man I met more than 40 years ago.
Lol. I see the idiot Don still hasn't responded the the thread right above this one where his challenge was met. Pretty pathetic.
Wow, 40 years with you!
Better than five with you, Don the Dummy.
Lol. Now he decides to respond almost three hours later. Figures. And then, of course, it all comes down to the correct/incorrect interpretation. Many Christians are experts at taking any side of any argument and being able to argue their point from the book of conflicted bullshit. Or as I like to call it, Gullible's Travels, Parts 1 & 2. This is why we see Christians today bicker with one another as much as they bicker with anyone else. This person is not a good Christian" / "That person is not a good Christian" / "I know you are, but what am I?"
No kidding, mama. Give 'em enough time and a bit of rope and they'll hang themselves every time.
Don wrote, "Primewonk, are you sure you want to stick 9,000,000,000 years? Since we are just making things up here why not go with a big number like 999,000,000,000 years?"
The universe began expanding 13,700,000,000 years ago. The earth formed 4,540,000,000 years ago. Are you capable of doing simple subtraction? If not, this shows that about 9,160,000,000 years elapsed between the universe beginning to expand and the earth forming.
If you are going to challange either of those numbers, you better do it using actual science.
Primewonk, I reject the ever changing estimates that these folks throw out there. There are also many scientists that refute these unproven estimates. In case you didn’t read the article 46% of Americans agree with me. But at least your subtraction was correct
Forty-six percent of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years, according to a survey released by Gallup in June. That number has remained unchanged for the past 30 years, since 1982, when Gallup first asked the question on creationism versus evolution.
Don wrote, "I reject the ever changing estimates that these folks throw out there."
And your level of scientific education that allows you to reject valid scientific evidence would be ....?
Earlier estimates for the age of the earth were based on the estimated age of the sun. Before we understood the process of nuclear fusion, we were off by orders of magnitude. Today the age of the earth is determined primarily by radiometric dating of meteor and asteroid fragments, since they were formed at the same time as the earth. The age of the universe is based on red shift and cosmic background radiation. Before we understood those, we were off by orders of magnitude.
Don also wrote, " There are also many scientists that refute these unproven estimates."
Then by all means, post the names of these many scientists, their qualifications, the research centers where they work, the age ranges they propose along with the scientific research that supports their claims.
Don also wrote, " In case you didn’t read the article 46% of Americans agree with me. But at least your subtraction was correct"
This simply shows that 46% of Americans are scientifically ignorant nutters.
Once again, epic fail Don.
Wonk, Let me see if I understand your logic. You put your faith in men, not in God but you believe 46% of men are scientifically ignorant nutters?
You are correct, epic fail.
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.