When someone goes to war, we hope & pray against it ...but, we know of the disturbing possibilities and realness of war, of the very nature of death.
We cannot rule out the fact of the possibility that someone on the other side may be praying too ...or at least having some degree of hope. But, when people arm themselves with weapons of war ...likely someone will die.
The family that I was talking about had their son severely injured ...near death. He was struggling to survive in a hospital in Texas. Meanwhile, his two younger brothers were driving from a summer camp meeting ...and were hit by a truck. They died instantly.
(Respectfully, I am not listing the name of the family, and hopefully if you think you know who I'm talking about ...out of respect, you won't mention the name either. I don't really know that much ...though my heart reaches out to this family, not judging anyone's feelings, nor how they chose to cope with such intense grief. I really do not converse with this family, though that does not prevent me from caring deeply about them.)
Understandably, this could be too much for any parent. And it was no surprise that one parent got angry with God.
But, anger is not good, nor healthy to endure too long. Instead of directing so much anger, it seemed (as I don't know, who could?) that this one parent attempted to find some form of peace in reaching out to the other children ...as certainly is a positive way to go. But, this parent also found some form of consolation in deciding to no longer believe in God.
My Mom had to have surgery recently ...understandably, my parents don't want to talk much about it. Some people cope by talking much ...but my parents didn't give me much information, they just said it was an aggressive cancer and Mom would require chemotherapy. Mom is 86 years old, and they say she is strong ...and hope she can deal with this. But, they don't want to talk about it much ...and perhaps that helps not to focus on it. I know some people who get cancer, and deny that they have it ...yet, my Mom is getting the treatments, she just feels it is healthier not to be preoccupied with thoughts about it.
Some people don't believe in God ...they deny He exists. Some people acknowledge that He exists, but don't like to talk about their feelings on the subject ...and thoughts about God do not occupy much of their time. Other people only seem to converse about God, while citing just negative emotion ...and its difficult to imagine whether they are complaining about His existence in their life, or about the fact that others say He exists, and they are protesting that concept.
God's character seems often to be on trial ...but, well-meaning believers try to understand what they don't initially perceive as right. In the Book of Job, God was accused of protecting this upright man ...and then Job himself was also accused. Who was he accused by?? Well, it was no less than the leader of the fallen angels.
This same fallen angel stirred the intellect in the Garden of Eden ...aiming to confuse and deceive. God is not the author of confusion, and therefore it seems rather difficult to believe that God would expect two people to 'multiply' ...when it would require an unbelievable amount of incest. Especially difficult to understand, is when Noah was a middle-aged man ...that God said to Noah that the wickedness of man was great, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
What I mean, is that ---if God expected for man to commit incest, that in itself would be in today's eyes a wicked start ---and the imaginations of the heart of anyone who'd be involved in this would be so confused and distorted that it could bring near irreparable damage to a person.
If I can't see what God is doing ...it is me who lacks the understanding. I do not challenge God's thinking or actions ...though I do at times disagree with what others feel that may be.
I can accept it either way ...the way that it was. But, I just favor to believe what seems to make much more sense to me.
Here are the two options that I see it could be:
The family that I was talking about had their son severely injured ...near death. He was struggling to survive in a hospital in Texas. Meanwhile, his two younger brothers were driving from a summer camp meeting ...and were hit by a truck. They died instantly.
(Respectfully, I am not listing the name of the family, and hopefully if you think you know who I'm talking about ...out of respect, you won't mention the name either. I don't really know that much ...though my heart reaches out to this family, not judging anyone's feelings, nor how they chose to cope with such intense grief. I really do not converse with this family, though that does not prevent me from caring deeply about them.)
Understandably, this could be too much for any parent. And it was no surprise that one parent got angry with God.
But, anger is not good, nor healthy to endure too long. Instead of directing so much anger, it seemed (as I don't know, who could?) that this one parent attempted to find some form of peace in reaching out to the other children ...as certainly is a positive way to go. But, this parent also found some form of consolation in deciding to no longer believe in God.
My Mom had to have surgery recently ...understandably, my parents don't want to talk much about it. Some people cope by talking much ...but my parents didn't give me much information, they just said it was an aggressive cancer and Mom would require chemotherapy. Mom is 86 years old, and they say she is strong ...and hope she can deal with this. But, they don't want to talk about it much ...and perhaps that helps not to focus on it. I know some people who get cancer, and deny that they have it ...yet, my Mom is getting the treatments, she just feels it is healthier not to be preoccupied with thoughts about it.
Some people don't believe in God ...they deny He exists. Some people acknowledge that He exists, but don't like to talk about their feelings on the subject ...and thoughts about God do not occupy much of their time. Other people only seem to converse about God, while citing just negative emotion ...and its difficult to imagine whether they are complaining about His existence in their life, or about the fact that others say He exists, and they are protesting that concept.
God's character seems often to be on trial ...but, well-meaning believers try to understand what they don't initially perceive as right. In the Book of Job, God was accused of protecting this upright man ...and then Job himself was also accused. Who was he accused by?? Well, it was no less than the leader of the fallen angels.
This same fallen angel stirred the intellect in the Garden of Eden ...aiming to confuse and deceive. God is not the author of confusion, and therefore it seems rather difficult to believe that God would expect two people to 'multiply' ...when it would require an unbelievable amount of incest. Especially difficult to understand, is when Noah was a middle-aged man ...that God said to Noah that the wickedness of man was great, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
What I mean, is that ---if God expected for man to commit incest, that in itself would be in today's eyes a wicked start ---and the imaginations of the heart of anyone who'd be involved in this would be so confused and distorted that it could bring near irreparable damage to a person.
If I can't see what God is doing ...it is me who lacks the understanding. I do not challenge God's thinking or actions ...though I do at times disagree with what others feel that may be.
I can accept it either way ...the way that it was. But, I just favor to believe what seems to make much more sense to me.
Here are the two options that I see it could be:
- God created the human race with much the same standards and lack of expectations as were bestowed upon the animals. Then God later decided to domesticate the humans.
- God set forth the standard much the same as He would have us have it today ...and the wickedness entered the world through our sin.
I prefer to believe in the second version. And I believe that in a similar way to how a person approaches another nation or people ...man (& woman) were to find a mate of the opposite gender, to acknowledge God & each other, while assigning value to the various aspects of life as God would have them do it.
When I read the first two Chapters of Genesis, I read of God creating man and woman ...outside the Garden. Adam was created and placed in the Garden ...so, he had to have been created outside the Garden to have been placed in it.
And the picture in my mind, as I read it, is that many men and women were created outside the Garden ...and only Adam was placed in it. This solves many other questions that I have asked others ...which they have failed to give me answers to.
Also, I'm quite certain that I have presented the furthering of this discussion in another 'blog' which I will have to find ...to share here:
{(http://thispartisnotfunyetseemsnecessary.blogspot.com/2017/03/blog-post_59.html) ---or more specifically, to the imagination, without jeopardizing truth (http://doyoubelievethatitisnot.blogspot.com/) ...and then, not to be fruitless, yet not to claim anything other than just food for thought ---(http://putmorethoughtintoitwiththanks.blogspot.com/)}
On the sixth day (Genesis 1:28), God told man & woman to be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth ...
Then already in Chapter 6, when mankind began to multiply ...God said wickedness was great, and every imagination of his heart was only evil continually.
How would you view incest??
I believe there were men and women outside the Garden. God placed Adam in the Garden, so that seems to say he was created outside the Garden. But, for those of you who feel there was only Adam & Eve ...then 'to multiply' would require much incest.
I've heard many people say that the gene pool was such that there would be no alarm for harm, whether physical or mental, therefore incest would not be a concern ...as if that was the only thing that God was concerned with at the time. You could say that God decides what is healthy at one time, and that can change ...either in one direction or another. Healthy incest becomes unhealthy ...and unhealthy pork of years gone by, becomes safe today, and people heartily consume it. Yes, we celebrate major holidays with hams ...and I'm not speaking of certain extrovert relatives. If incest was healthy in the beginning, but later created unhealthy birth complications ...what if our technology and advances in medicine proved capable of fixing those complications, would we once again accept incest as an okay thing??
Yes, how do we view incest??
Also, I'm quite certain that I have presented the furthering of this discussion in another 'blog' which I will have to find ...to share here:
{(http://thispartisnotfunyetseemsnecessary.blogspot.com/2017/03/blog-post_59.html) ---or more specifically, to the imagination, without jeopardizing truth (http://doyoubelievethatitisnot.blogspot.com/) ...and then, not to be fruitless, yet not to claim anything other than just food for thought ---(http://putmorethoughtintoitwiththanks.blogspot.com/)}
On the sixth day (Genesis 1:28), God told man & woman to be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth ...
Then already in Chapter 6, when mankind began to multiply ...God said wickedness was great, and every imagination of his heart was only evil continually.
How would you view incest??
I believe there were men and women outside the Garden. God placed Adam in the Garden, so that seems to say he was created outside the Garden. But, for those of you who feel there was only Adam & Eve ...then 'to multiply' would require much incest.
I've heard many people say that the gene pool was such that there would be no alarm for harm, whether physical or mental, therefore incest would not be a concern ...as if that was the only thing that God was concerned with at the time. You could say that God decides what is healthy at one time, and that can change ...either in one direction or another. Healthy incest becomes unhealthy ...and unhealthy pork of years gone by, becomes safe today, and people heartily consume it. Yes, we celebrate major holidays with hams ...and I'm not speaking of certain extrovert relatives. If incest was healthy in the beginning, but later created unhealthy birth complications ...what if our technology and advances in medicine proved capable of fixing those complications, would we once again accept incest as an okay thing??
Yes, how do we view incest??
- Strange?
- Maladapted?
- Unacceptable?
- Sick?
- Wicked?
- Evil?
Doesn't one twisted behavior ...actually lead to more of the same, often reaching new heights of disturbing thoughts??
And who knows this more ...than God??
God created the nuclear family, and it is of utmost importance what happens within those households.
And who knows this more ...than God??
God created the nuclear family, and it is of utmost importance what happens within those households.
So, when God mentioned 'wickedness' in Chapter 6, what did that mean??
I believe that incest is at least quite significantly sick ...yet, it would only get worse. And yes, I believe it is on the path of wickedness. Yet again, it is not so important what I think ...but, significantly so what God says. And when God told man & woman to multiply ...if He intended it to be through incest, then why would He then find reason to flood the earth, to rid it of that which He left them no recourse but to do??
I don't challenge God's character ...no, I merely try to understand it. And we lack understanding when we say things like ...God being unloving to allow suffering, since God is in control of everything, and could end all pain & suffering at any time He wants.
But, that's another topic ...and though I've had that conversation, I'm not having it here. I'm focusing on the incest thing. But, let me provide two different approaches:
- To domesticate us from the wild (yes, I'm considering incest a wild idea).
- Set up a proper & healthy standard to begin with, then sin taints it.
The end of Chapter 2, tells us that man is to leave his dad & mom, and cleave unto his wife. The reference to 'wife' means much more than a physical commitment ...it is spiritual & giving a much deeper insight into God's love. If incest was between a parent and a child, how could it be to both leave a parents and cleave to a parent at the same time. And considering incest between a brother and a sister, it seems very likely that the son would leave 'dad & mom' to hide ...but, I don't see God saying that man should cleave unto his sister.
And speaking of hiding, when Adam & Eve hid in the Garden ...they hid because the 'knew' things weren't right. I also believe the brother and sister would also have the same sense of 'right & wrong', which is a spiritual 'knowing'.
Of course, many of you may say that it wasn't wrong back then. Yet, once again, I would beg to disagree. The Book of Romans, Chapter 1, verse 19 (and many surrounding verses) addresses this: "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has shown it unto them."
So, what does God consider wicked?? Wars have been way too numerous throughout history, and people die because of the horrors of war. Yet, aside from that ...accidents, natural causes, and many other causes lead to death, but aside from war (the cause of it is most always debatable), what deliberate ending of a human life do we consider acceptable?? And what would be the reasons??
Would abortion today be considered acceptable in the case of incest?? And when I say 'acceptable', it begs the question of 'acceptable' to who. Sadly, a shocking number of people believe abortion is acceptable in any situation. The term 'inconvenience' often comes up when organized crime decides to take action.
(http://stephenmeinerfacebook.blogspot.com/2012/01/thanatophobia-fear-of-death-common-to.html)
Would we consider convenience a good reason?? Would we plan for the death of our elderly, if it becomes inconvenient to care for them?? Not likely ...they can talk, and they may remove us from their Last Will and Testament. So, just wait for them to die ...don't let them know of your thoughts. Okay, I mentioned this to make a point, as I do believe this is rather wicked to reason this way.
Why am I going on a tangent?? Well, bare with me a bit. I suppose you think it is absurd for me to suggest that we'd ever reach a point of considering ending a life for the mere reason of convenience ...but, isn't that what we do with abortion. Oh, that's right, they don't talk ...nor do they have a bank account.
We are supposed to be a civilized nation ...yet, there are people we would consider uncivilized, that seem to have a clearer vision of right & wrong, even though their culture and traditions may be very wrong. One example is the Mouk people of Indonesia. Their transformation is shown through a video by New Tribes Mission. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjRTBQcf-uc)
There is also documented ...the existence of a tribe in Indonesia who still practice incest. But, like the Mouk tribe, they'd likely be easier to convince of their wrongdoing ...than in a nation like ours.
Back to Adam & Eve ...they were sent from the Garden, and they had two sons. Abel was not able to multiply ...and Cain following the aftermath, he was able to multiply. But, was it like St. Elsewhere, the final episode ...within his imagination, and he felt he was elsewhere?? Yes, we know many of us fear the unknowns ...but, I feel it was written not to show Cain's delusional behavior, fearing things that didn't exist.
This may be difficult to follow, but I see many similarities between missionaries and marriage. But, it may not be what you think.
I mentioned this earlier, where you acknowledge and show social acceptance. A missionary doesn't go into a tribal village, and begin to point out all their sin. They show interest in the people, maybe even help with medical treatment, food distribution, or know-how. Marriage also begins with a relationship of first showing interest, healthy treatment of each other, and often paying for someone's meal.
A missionary would eventually show interest in sharing about God, and so would a couple interested in a relationship with God's blessings. A commitment of marriage may proceed as a couple plans for future dreams, and the missionary's hopes also involve each person's understanding of the marriage-type of relationship we have with God ...to avoid future nightmares.
I believe that when Adam & Eve were sent from the Garden, they were sent as the first missionaries (as I believe Cain didn't merely imagine the people he feared, then mated with them).
Be certain that I am not poking fun at how others view God planning our beginning ...as I don't really know. If I'm coming across a little too sarcastic, confident, or arrogant ...forgive me, I do not believe I am smarter than anyone else. (I'm not even like the little boy who said, "Daddy, Mommy ...look at the picture I drew!" It's more like opening a gift, and sharing the excitement, "Thank you ...this is so wonderful, who do I thank?"
Yes, thank God.
I realize the fear and hesitation in trying to go against tradition ...and all those who so solidly cling to it without question. On the contrary, when these subjects come up, I don't fearfully imagine like so many feel Cain did ....it's just that I feel able to discuss that which I feel God has shown me. I find it to be beautiful ...and I find it not to be problematic. I can accept something on faith, but how much more exciting when feeling we understand more how God put it all together.
So many people struggle with their attempts to rationalize without treading upon tradition. And so many more seem to embrace those like Freud, who talked about the Oedipus complex ...which was not at all the case with what Sophocles played out in his tragic Greek drama over 400 years before Jesus was born. Oedipus didn't know his dad and mom. It was more like the Disney movie, Tangled. But, let's not get tangled up or sidetracked.
Neither do I believe God had mankind to pattern their lives after the Egyptian rulers of old ...where they felt they themselves were deities, and had to preserve their bloodlines by not tainting it with humans. So, they were involved in the very behaviors which I don't interpret God's Word to be mentioning in Chapter 6 ...which the Egyptians more than imagined, yet which many of us imagine to have been real for God's people also, just previous to the Flood.
{///And here is a point ---the ancient Egyptian rulers presented themselves as deities, and married within their own nuclear families ---yet, did this also happen with God's followers?? I've already presented a point of view that Adam & Eve's family did not. Then there are those who point out the clear conditions that existed after the Flood of Noah's time. They could easily have just practiced cousins marrying cousins ...which has often happened, even during present times, though often not void of some teasing. Then comes the case of Abraham, who was actually named Abram at the time. Writings based upon beliefs founded in Islam, have said that Sarah (or Sarai) was the wife of Abram's brother. As we read of the case of Judah, in the Bible, his son Er married Tamar ...then Er died. According to their customs, Judah then gave his next son Onan ...to wed Tamar. But, when Onan died, Judah hesitated to give his son Shelah, for Tamar to wed. (The reasons can be found in Genesis 38:6-26). So, it could be understood that if that were the case for Abram, upon his brother's death, he may marry his brother's widow. Others assume that Abram and his two brothers were triplets ...but, that is just conjecture. Yet, with the scenario that Sarah (Sarai) was also born as a sister of the three ...no, that is not the Islam version, but it's the view of many Christians. Abram told Pharaoh (Genesis 12) that Sarah was his sister. Patriarchal tradition, under Hurrian law, dealt with sterility conditions, making allowances when appropriate. They also had terms we are likely not familiar with today ...such as, grouping marriage & adoption, and wife-sisterhood. You can further research the subject of Hurrian law ...but, you'd be correct in saying I'm not hurryin' with my point. Yes, later, to Abimelech (Genesis 20), Abraham clarified further that Sarah was his dad's daughter, but not his mom's daughter.
Now, I'm going to take liberty to create some dialogue that I made up ...so, I repeat, this part is not what the Bible says.
Here goes:
Terah (Abram's dad): Haran, this is such a grand event.
Haran: Dad, I hope you can manage around here without me.
Terah: I still have Nahor (II) and Abram ...and I don't consider it as losing a son, I'm gaining a daughter.
Haran (laughs): If you gain a daughter, then I must be gaining a sister. You mean I am going to be marrying my sister?
Abram (laughs): No, don't say that ...we're not like those rulers in Egypt.
***And if you recall later, with Moses, as Pastor Myron has told us, the plagues against Egypt had much to do with their false beliefs and worship ...as was the case with the frogs. So, could Abram also be in some way drawing out the absurd beliefs of the Egyptians ...telling them that she is his sister, and also his wife?? Some people say that these are half-truths, or white lies. So, if we feel there is some sort of play with words, and we feel Abraham lied once ...what's to say he didn't continue on with the deception, or joking around?? As the riddle could go ...she whom his dad calls his now present daughter, would not be his mom's daughter, as his mom was not alive at the time of his marriage. So, his wife could be called his dad's daughter ...just like my father-in-law could call me son, and I, could refer to him as Dad. And summarizing, Genesis 11:31, states that Terah took his son, Abram, with him ...and Sarai, his daughter-in-law (not Terah's daughter, or his dad's daughter as Abraham claims in Genesis 20:12)****
And you can also recall that Isaac used his dad's line, to Abimelech (king of the Philistines) ...stating that Rebekah was his sister (Genesis 26:7). Did Isaac have a sister? Sarah was barren until she was 90 years old. Need I say more? Maybe not, but I usually do.\\\}
So, do I proudly stand against some traditional beliefs??
Not at all ...on the contrary, it has not given me much acceptance. Bible believers have long followed what people have told them ...and as it is read in the Bible, that is the way it is commonly perceived. And I don't have problem with that. It brings for good conversation.
(http://stephenmeinerfacebook.blogspot.com/2012/01/recently-read-post-which-questioned-why.html)
Now, let me say, if I see a beautiful double rainbow ...yes, I'd like to share it. But, if I am unable to, I am still thankful that God had it there for me to see and picture in my mind.
What do I trust??
Not just a narrative, but The Word of God ...the Bible. Not just a story, but the truth.
I don't know how to interpret everything that is written in the Bible. And I don't claim that my ideas are the way you should perceive it. I thank you for joining me here. I enjoy writing ...and I've enjoyed reading what many of you have said ...but, I mostly enjoyed studying the Bible. I look at everything in light of that ...and I know God sheds his Light. I just pray that I receive His Word correctly. And I am thankful each time to reflect upon Him.
And speaking of hiding, when Adam & Eve hid in the Garden ...they hid because the 'knew' things weren't right. I also believe the brother and sister would also have the same sense of 'right & wrong', which is a spiritual 'knowing'.
Of course, many of you may say that it wasn't wrong back then. Yet, once again, I would beg to disagree. The Book of Romans, Chapter 1, verse 19 (and many surrounding verses) addresses this: "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has shown it unto them."
So, what does God consider wicked?? Wars have been way too numerous throughout history, and people die because of the horrors of war. Yet, aside from that ...accidents, natural causes, and many other causes lead to death, but aside from war (the cause of it is most always debatable), what deliberate ending of a human life do we consider acceptable?? And what would be the reasons??
Would abortion today be considered acceptable in the case of incest?? And when I say 'acceptable', it begs the question of 'acceptable' to who. Sadly, a shocking number of people believe abortion is acceptable in any situation. The term 'inconvenience' often comes up when organized crime decides to take action.
(http://stephenmeinerfacebook.blogspot.com/2012/01/thanatophobia-fear-of-death-common-to.html)
Would we consider convenience a good reason?? Would we plan for the death of our elderly, if it becomes inconvenient to care for them?? Not likely ...they can talk, and they may remove us from their Last Will and Testament. So, just wait for them to die ...don't let them know of your thoughts. Okay, I mentioned this to make a point, as I do believe this is rather wicked to reason this way.
Why am I going on a tangent?? Well, bare with me a bit. I suppose you think it is absurd for me to suggest that we'd ever reach a point of considering ending a life for the mere reason of convenience ...but, isn't that what we do with abortion. Oh, that's right, they don't talk ...nor do they have a bank account.
We are supposed to be a civilized nation ...yet, there are people we would consider uncivilized, that seem to have a clearer vision of right & wrong, even though their culture and traditions may be very wrong. One example is the Mouk people of Indonesia. Their transformation is shown through a video by New Tribes Mission. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjRTBQcf-uc)
There is also documented ...the existence of a tribe in Indonesia who still practice incest. But, like the Mouk tribe, they'd likely be easier to convince of their wrongdoing ...than in a nation like ours.
Back to Adam & Eve ...they were sent from the Garden, and they had two sons. Abel was not able to multiply ...and Cain following the aftermath, he was able to multiply. But, was it like St. Elsewhere, the final episode ...within his imagination, and he felt he was elsewhere?? Yes, we know many of us fear the unknowns ...but, I feel it was written not to show Cain's delusional behavior, fearing things that didn't exist.
This may be difficult to follow, but I see many similarities between missionaries and marriage. But, it may not be what you think.
I mentioned this earlier, where you acknowledge and show social acceptance. A missionary doesn't go into a tribal village, and begin to point out all their sin. They show interest in the people, maybe even help with medical treatment, food distribution, or know-how. Marriage also begins with a relationship of first showing interest, healthy treatment of each other, and often paying for someone's meal.
A missionary would eventually show interest in sharing about God, and so would a couple interested in a relationship with God's blessings. A commitment of marriage may proceed as a couple plans for future dreams, and the missionary's hopes also involve each person's understanding of the marriage-type of relationship we have with God ...to avoid future nightmares.
I believe that when Adam & Eve were sent from the Garden, they were sent as the first missionaries (as I believe Cain didn't merely imagine the people he feared, then mated with them).
Be certain that I am not poking fun at how others view God planning our beginning ...as I don't really know. If I'm coming across a little too sarcastic, confident, or arrogant ...forgive me, I do not believe I am smarter than anyone else. (I'm not even like the little boy who said, "Daddy, Mommy ...look at the picture I drew!" It's more like opening a gift, and sharing the excitement, "Thank you ...this is so wonderful, who do I thank?"
Yes, thank God.
I realize the fear and hesitation in trying to go against tradition ...and all those who so solidly cling to it without question. On the contrary, when these subjects come up, I don't fearfully imagine like so many feel Cain did ....it's just that I feel able to discuss that which I feel God has shown me. I find it to be beautiful ...and I find it not to be problematic. I can accept something on faith, but how much more exciting when feeling we understand more how God put it all together.
So many people struggle with their attempts to rationalize without treading upon tradition. And so many more seem to embrace those like Freud, who talked about the Oedipus complex ...which was not at all the case with what Sophocles played out in his tragic Greek drama over 400 years before Jesus was born. Oedipus didn't know his dad and mom. It was more like the Disney movie, Tangled. But, let's not get tangled up or sidetracked.
Neither do I believe God had mankind to pattern their lives after the Egyptian rulers of old ...where they felt they themselves were deities, and had to preserve their bloodlines by not tainting it with humans. So, they were involved in the very behaviors which I don't interpret God's Word to be mentioning in Chapter 6 ...which the Egyptians more than imagined, yet which many of us imagine to have been real for God's people also, just previous to the Flood.
{///And here is a point ---the ancient Egyptian rulers presented themselves as deities, and married within their own nuclear families ---yet, did this also happen with God's followers?? I've already presented a point of view that Adam & Eve's family did not. Then there are those who point out the clear conditions that existed after the Flood of Noah's time. They could easily have just practiced cousins marrying cousins ...which has often happened, even during present times, though often not void of some teasing. Then comes the case of Abraham, who was actually named Abram at the time. Writings based upon beliefs founded in Islam, have said that Sarah (or Sarai) was the wife of Abram's brother. As we read of the case of Judah, in the Bible, his son Er married Tamar ...then Er died. According to their customs, Judah then gave his next son Onan ...to wed Tamar. But, when Onan died, Judah hesitated to give his son Shelah, for Tamar to wed. (The reasons can be found in Genesis 38:6-26). So, it could be understood that if that were the case for Abram, upon his brother's death, he may marry his brother's widow. Others assume that Abram and his two brothers were triplets ...but, that is just conjecture. Yet, with the scenario that Sarah (Sarai) was also born as a sister of the three ...no, that is not the Islam version, but it's the view of many Christians. Abram told Pharaoh (Genesis 12) that Sarah was his sister. Patriarchal tradition, under Hurrian law, dealt with sterility conditions, making allowances when appropriate. They also had terms we are likely not familiar with today ...such as, grouping marriage & adoption, and wife-sisterhood. You can further research the subject of Hurrian law ...but, you'd be correct in saying I'm not hurryin' with my point. Yes, later, to Abimelech (Genesis 20), Abraham clarified further that Sarah was his dad's daughter, but not his mom's daughter.
Now, I'm going to take liberty to create some dialogue that I made up ...so, I repeat, this part is not what the Bible says.
Here goes:
Terah (Abram's dad): Haran, this is such a grand event.
Haran: Dad, I hope you can manage around here without me.
Terah: I still have Nahor (II) and Abram ...and I don't consider it as losing a son, I'm gaining a daughter.
Haran (laughs): If you gain a daughter, then I must be gaining a sister. You mean I am going to be marrying my sister?
Abram (laughs): No, don't say that ...we're not like those rulers in Egypt.
***And if you recall later, with Moses, as Pastor Myron has told us, the plagues against Egypt had much to do with their false beliefs and worship ...as was the case with the frogs. So, could Abram also be in some way drawing out the absurd beliefs of the Egyptians ...telling them that she is his sister, and also his wife?? Some people say that these are half-truths, or white lies. So, if we feel there is some sort of play with words, and we feel Abraham lied once ...what's to say he didn't continue on with the deception, or joking around?? As the riddle could go ...she whom his dad calls his now present daughter, would not be his mom's daughter, as his mom was not alive at the time of his marriage. So, his wife could be called his dad's daughter ...just like my father-in-law could call me son, and I, could refer to him as Dad. And summarizing, Genesis 11:31, states that Terah took his son, Abram, with him ...and Sarai, his daughter-in-law (not Terah's daughter, or his dad's daughter as Abraham claims in Genesis 20:12)****
And you can also recall that Isaac used his dad's line, to Abimelech (king of the Philistines) ...stating that Rebekah was his sister (Genesis 26:7). Did Isaac have a sister? Sarah was barren until she was 90 years old. Need I say more? Maybe not, but I usually do.\\\}
So, do I proudly stand against some traditional beliefs??
Not at all ...on the contrary, it has not given me much acceptance. Bible believers have long followed what people have told them ...and as it is read in the Bible, that is the way it is commonly perceived. And I don't have problem with that. It brings for good conversation.
(http://stephenmeinerfacebook.blogspot.com/2012/01/recently-read-post-which-questioned-why.html)
Now, let me say, if I see a beautiful double rainbow ...yes, I'd like to share it. But, if I am unable to, I am still thankful that God had it there for me to see and picture in my mind.
What do I trust??
Not just a narrative, but The Word of God ...the Bible. Not just a story, but the truth.
I don't know how to interpret everything that is written in the Bible. And I don't claim that my ideas are the way you should perceive it. I thank you for joining me here. I enjoy writing ...and I've enjoyed reading what many of you have said ...but, I mostly enjoyed studying the Bible. I look at everything in light of that ...and I know God sheds his Light. I just pray that I receive His Word correctly. And I am thankful each time to reflect upon Him.
