GC, did I use the word FAULT? I meant what I said in the way DNA is passed to the next generation. The children of one mother and one father vary rarely have Genetic differences on the level of racial difference. If the mother and Father are Red then three children are all going to be Red. But when those children marry three different women then they are going to have different genes passed down to their offspring. For you to argue like I meant what I said to mean something else is shortsighted and argumentative.

In the case of Biracial children the DNA Chromosomes of the mother and Father usually create children which look the same. It is very rare for even a white woman/ black man marriage to have children that look all black or all white, they usually are Mulatto or light skinned as a result. So if you think about this the idea that Noah and his wife had three children and one looked white and one looked black and one looked asian does not make sense. The division would have to be after the children.

Also, when I used the word 'inbreeding' it was a hastily, ill chosen word. I should have used the same word Mrs White used, 'Amalgamation' because it was the intent of what I meant.

The three different races "amalgamated" in different ways not inbred, because that would imply within their own families, which was also a problem but it was not the intent of what I meant.

JSOT,

I guess you believe that blacks and whites should not marry because it would deface the image of God. So all those "mulattoes" would be "defaced" in your view, i.e. the products of "amalgamation"?

That is what sounds racist to me.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Basically, JSOT, that is the concept that I think has fostered so much ill will regarding even the idea of discussing the several races. Some try to argue that we are all of just one race. I agree with them--partially. We are all of the human race. But the usage of the word can change its sense. In one sense, we are all human. Any human should therefore be of the same biblical "kind," and it should not have been a sin to marry another human. In another sense, we have "races" of mankind that have clearly differentiated in their physical characteristics. This is alluded to both in the Bible and in Mrs. White's writings, especially the latter.

This discussion was started on the question of whether or not the races could all have come from Adam. I'm not sure that question has been fully resolved, but I think there are sufficient hints given us to open up the question to some other possibilities, such as that of the intermingling of man and beast. For my part, I think God may well have adjusted Cain's genetics, and why would we not see other adjustments along the way for other reasons? You suggested the power of harmful atmospheric radiation to affect the DNA. I agree that this can and does perhaps make genetic alterations in certain individuals. However, I would be less willing to accept that these alterations were responsible for creating new races of mankind. To think such a think would be to assume some almost impossible and/or extremely racist concepts: 1) that all the adjustments took place disproportionately in one race over others (which is why not every human degenerated in the same fashion and remained more or less a homogeneous race); and/or 2) that one race or another is a mutation of the species or a result of mutation (a good piece for the start of some animated discussion, no doubt). I would not be willing to suggest either of them as possibilities.

If you think through some of the ideas you've been expressing, I think you might see where they would logically lead. Hopefully, at that point, the evidence helps you to abandon such thinking. Even if it were true (which I don't believe) that one race or another of mankind were a mutation of the species or caused by such, I would hope that no one would walk around pointing it out--for it would surely lead to some of the most racist thinking possible.

Think about it.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

EGW stated the following in regards to the mark of Cain:

Per the bolded and underlined section of the above quote it seems like anybody can bear the mark of Cain.

Daryl,

That quote has already been posted in this thread and responded to, if you'll go back and read it. It is obvious, biblically, that this quote refers to a symbolic mark whereas the Bible event with Cain involved a literal one. So this quote brings an orange into a discussion of apples.

Here's another quote from Mrs. White about Cain's transgression that brings a worthwhile point to this discussion.



The question might be asked: "If Cain's life was spared, why wasn't that enough?" In other words, "why did God mark Cain?" Answer that, and it is readily seen that this was a visible mark. It had to be a visible one, because it was given so that others, upon seeing it, would fear to kill him. Thus, Cain's life was doubly spared--first from God, and second from man. God was merciful in order to teach the universe the results of permitting sin.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I noticed that too.



and

Kland,

"Fair," as in "my fair lady," used to mean simply "beautiful." It has taken on a more modern meaning of "light" or "white." In any case, when I used the word, I was but quoting it from the Bible's own translation, which was done centuries ago when the word still meant "beautiful." I already explained here that the Hebrew does not indicate any color.

As for yours and JSOT's understanding of my position having changed, I'm glad I'm finally able to make myself more clear. I don't always manage to explain things well the first time around, so it may appear to you that my position has changed when your understanding of it has been updated.

God bless,

Green Cochoa.

WHAT? This is the greatest stretch of the imagination that I have ever heard. And why are you putting words into my mouth by putting "defaced" in quotation marks? Show me where I said that. This would be suitable grounds for a libel case in the world of journalism.

I suppose if you knew me these words would have never come out of your mouth or from your mind.

I am the greatest supporter of equal rights other than our creator then you will ever meet. My wife is Asian and I come the greatest line of bigots you could ever imagine. You have no idea what I have gone through in this life. I would say how dare you, but I won't because I actually think you are a truly devoted man. But you should be careful how you judge me.

That is not how I or Mrs White was using the term 'amalgamation', it is not derogatory, it simply means to mix
one race with another. I actually believe in usually results in F1 hybrids in genetic terms. An alpha male from one race married to an alpha female from another usually creates beautiful, intelligent, and strong children. But if you want to play the race game with me, I'll just state that I am less inclined to think on those terms then you obviously are.

But what strikes me is how you seem to be striking against our SDA prophet Mrs White... She didn't mean the term amalgamation the way you cited either so why are playing against her here?
Are you saying you are against what she present in our doctrines on this subject?

Amen, this is exactly what my God has shown me and in perfect harmony with what I stated earlier, soundly resolved in my mind.

You mean to tell me that James was misusing the sense of the word and putting into it something which wasn't there? And that he shouldn't do such things?

Good Advice.

"Blessings".