Mike Huckabee is the next president of the U.S.

[Lookout]

I, for one, would love to see your sources that convey that god made man LONG before Adam and eve, thus, solving the mystery of post-eden mates for A&E's progeny.

Indeed, the very idea that people think it is crazy that the Earth *Poof* appeared circa 6k years ago is a small step for science and a giant leap for reason. Certainly, blasphemy from back in the day.

Ok Shogun, you asked for it, here it is. Refering to how LONG is not certain, but it certainly is prior to Adam & Eve.
KJV. Genesis 1:26 And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness: And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
KJV. Genesis 1:27 So God created Man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he THEM.
KJV. Genesis 2:7 And the Lord God formed Man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.
KJV. Genesis 2:8 And the lord God planted a Garden eastward in Eden and there he put the man whom he had formed.

Sorry to say, there was no insest to the lineage to Christ.

 

[mattskramer]

Ok Shogun, you asked for it, here it is. Refering to how LONG is not certain, but it certainly is prior to Adam & Eve.
KJV. Genesis 1:26 And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness: And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
KJV. Genesis 1:27 So God created Man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he THEM.
KJV. Genesis 2:7 And the Lord God formed Man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.
KJV. Genesis 2:8 And the lord God planted a Garden eastward in Eden and there he put the man whom he had formed.

Sorry to say, there was no insest to the lineage to Christ.

Yet, wasn’t there incest among Adam and Eve and their children – if we are to take the Bible literally and not add extra stuff to it?

 

[Lookout]

Yet, wasn’t there incest among Adam and Eve and their children – if we are to take the Bible literally and not add extra stuff to it?

There is nothing being added here. Genesis 1 is one event and Genesis 2 is a seperate event. Why in the world would God say incest is okay for a little while when He says it is a sin that the punishment is death? God is not wishy washy.

 

[SolarEnergy1]

The aura of God?

Please tell me that was a joke! LOL. If Huckabee wins, Obama is the next president.

Are you kidding? A far left senator not even 1 full term in the senate VS a 10 1/2 year Governor... What are you smoking?

 

[Shogun]

Ok Shogun, you asked for it, here it is. Refering to how LONG is not certain, but it certainly is prior to Adam & Eve.
KJV. Genesis 1:26 And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness: And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
KJV. Genesis 1:27 So God created Man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he THEM.
KJV. Genesis 2:7 And the Lord God formed Man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.
KJV. Genesis 2:8 And the lord God planted a Garden eastward in Eden and there he put the man whom he had formed.

Sorry to say, there was no insest to the lineage to Christ.

I'm not quite sure i'm reading the same texts the way you are. I can see how you might interpret these passages in such a way but, from what I see, it reads like so:


the Grand tale of the seven day creation
1:26 let us make man
1:27 God creates man, both man and woman, in his image


Seems to me that the second chapter is a clarification to give details about the seven day creation and specifically draws a line between creation and the end of creating with resting on the seventh day.

2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

If anything, I'd have used 2:4 to indicate generations of other humans (or the volution of man even)
2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,


It seems to me that the second chapter is trying to fill in details in the Creation of man from the Grand tale of seven day creation. Notice that the seeds were in the ground but hadn't grown until the mist arose on the earth and THEN he created Adam which correlates with god creating plantlife BEFORE creating animals and then man. Day 2 (grass, etc), day 4 (animal life) and day 5 (Human) from Gen. 1 correlated with the following.
2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth,
2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

 

[mattskramer]

There is nothing being added here. Genesis 1 is one event and Genesis 2 is a seperate event. Why in the world would God say incest is okay for a little while when He says it is a sin that the punishment is death? God is not wishy washy.

http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html#ExtraPeople

If God created the extra people before the fall then are we led to believe that all the people God created also chose to eat from the Tree of Knowledge? This doesn't seem to make sense, because when Adam and Eve ate of it he appeared to them and told them off. God has quite a presence and it would no doubt be enough to scare off anyone else from eating from the tree! Either God let them all eat, knowing none of them had the knowledge required for them to distrust the serpent or to understand that disobedience was wrong, in which case God is an immensely poor parent. A parent knows that its children do not know not to touch a hot pan. So, parents warn their children not to. When their children go to touch the pan, the parent does more than just warn them. Because the parent knows that the child is not capable of understanding why not to touch the pan, the parent steps in and physically protects the child. God did not do this with Adam and Eve and anyone who was around: God did not protect its children from the danger. God is a bad parent.

God must have created the extra people after the fall. But this seems to be wrong. Because that would mean that God was creating imperfect people who were not the children of Adam and Eve. People who are not the children of Adam and Eve would not suffer from death or disease (which are the effects of original sin). So God created these extra people and created them with weakness to death and disease on purpose. If this is true, if God created these people like that, then original sin doesn't explain death and disease as these people were not subject to the original sin.

The explanation that God created more people than just Adam and Eve shows us that the Adam and Eve story is not a valid excuse for death "entering the world". God himself created death and the Adam and Eve story is merely apologetics on behalf of fearful God believers who wish to think of Humans as evil due to our own actions, and not due to Creation. The truth is, Human Beings were not created by an omni-benevolent God and the Adam and Eve story fails to reconcile God and evil, God is still immoral.

Creation of more people before the fall seems more likely.
The criticism resulting from God creating people after the fall is less serious than that if he created them before. In the latter case we merely conclude that he is a bad parent, and perhaps not omniscient, whereas if he created people after the fall he is a downright immoral monster.

Anyway, if you can resolve this seemingly these illogical or at lest unreasonable conclusions, there are many more absurd, contradictory, and scientifically unsound statements in the Bible.

See http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

 

[pegwinn]

Well, we can certainly discuss this further as I'm off to sleep, too. But, as always, a pleasure discussing these issues with you.

Have a good night!

I'm baaaaaaaaak Slept good, got up early, worked smart and hard. Great American Day.

We do get taxed on interest income. Under a "fair tax" we wouldn't be. But the money made by the middle class doesn't predominantly come from interest income or dividends. That only applies to the wealthy. Yup, and as an aside the wealthy currently pay and care more under Capital Gains than mere income. See the trick is to report as little income as you can get away with because the CG tax is cheaper.

I remember when they were originally talking about the "flat tax" (as opposed to the "fair tax"... which is their latest effort to kill social security and social programs, IMO) and people calling it the "help steve forbes keep his fortune" tax. heh.... NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO You are being seriously misinformed, disinformed, lied to, etc. You are not this dumb. Please, take the time to read the actual legislation at www.thomas.gov. Enter HR 25 in the search box and select bill number. It should come up with the Fairtax Act of 2007. Please, take the time to checkout Fairtax.org. Please take the time to read the fairtax book (which is in most public libraries now), and check out the upcoming book.

Jillian dear, I will send you my copy of the second book (I am pre-ordering it from Amazon tonight) after I finish it if you promise to sign it and send it back

Onwards......

 

[Lookout]

http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html#ExtraPeople

If God created the extra people before the fall then are we led to believe that all the people God created also chose to eat from the Tree of Knowledge? This doesn't seem to make sense, because when Adam and Eve ate of it he appeared to them and told them off. God has quite a presence and it would no doubt be enough to scare off anyone else from eating from the tree! Either God let them all eat, knowing none of them had the knowledge required for them to distrust the serpent or to understand that disobedience was wrong, in which case God is an immensely poor parent. A parent knows that its children do not know not to touch a hot pan. So, parents warn their children not to. When their children go to touch the pan, the parent does more than just warn them. Because the parent knows that the child is not capable of understanding why not to touch the pan, the parent steps in and physically protects the child. God did not do this with Adam and Eve and anyone who was around: God did not protect its children from the danger. God is a bad parent.

God must have created the extra people after the fall. But this seems to be wrong. Because that would mean that God was creating imperfect people who were not the children of Adam and Eve. People who are not the children of Adam and Eve would not suffer from death or disease (which are the effects of original sin). So God created these extra people and created them with weakness to death and disease on purpose. If this is true, if God created these people like that, then original sin doesn't explain death and disease as these people were not subject to the original sin.

The explanation that God created more people than just Adam and Eve shows us that the Adam and Eve story is not a valid excuse for death "entering the world". God himself created death and the Adam and Eve story is merely apologetics on behalf of fearful God believers who wish to think of Humans as evil due to our own actions, and not due to Creation. The truth is, Human Beings were not created by an omni-benevolent God and the Adam and Eve story fails to reconcile God and evil, God is still immoral.

Creation of more people before the fall seems more likely.
The criticism resulting from God creating people after the fall is less serious than that if he created them before. In the latter case we merely conclude that he is a bad parent, and perhaps not omniscient, whereas if he created people after the fall he is a downright immoral monster.

Anyway, if you can resolve this seemingly these illogical or at lest unreasonable conclusions, there are many more absurd, contradictory, and scientifically unsound statements in the Bible.

See http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

Good luck with all that.

 

[Lookout]

Sorry Shogun and everybody for blowing up the message board. Ya-know...You go telling the real truth about God and wierd things start happening.

 

[mattskramer]

Good luck with all that.

What do you mean by “good luck with that”? I’m pretty much convinced that the Bible has too many inconsistencies, contradictions, and scientifically unsound statements to be taken literally as the “word of god”. It seems to have some good advice, as do many books, and it makes for entertaining adventuresome reading, but that is about all.

 

[Taomon]

How white of you.

You are such a liar. It takes you three paychecks to save up to have 10.00, you won't give that up. That's your crack money.

 

[Taomon]

Good luck with all that.

It is very simple...Genesis is nothing but a story. It was written by men who did not understand science or nature to explain where we came from and subjugate us to the rules outlined in the Torah and then later the Bible.

Anyone who argues for the belief in creationism is proving there ignorance and naivete'

 

[Steerpike]

It is very simple...Genesis is nothing but a story. It was written by men who did not understand science or nature to explain where we came from and subjugate us to the rules outlined in the Torah and then later the Bible.

Anyone who argues for the belief in creationism is proving there ignorance and naivete'

Actually is was written by men who had knowledge of the long-standing Sumerian creation myth, which is quite similar to Genesis in a number of ways

 

[Shogun]

Sorry Shogun and everybody for blowing up the message board. Ya-know...You go telling the real truth about God and wierd things start happening.

dont mention it..

Now, would you care to masticate my rebuttal offering?

 

[Lookout]

dont mention it..

Now, would you care to masticate my rebuttal offering?

Sure, I just don't know where to start. Everyone has opinions on just what the translations are and very few see it exactly the same. I believe Gen 1 and Gen 2 represent two different frames of time. Some will argue that Gen 2 is a recap of Gen 1. I personally believe they represent 2 distinct happenings and time periods The first 6 days and the 7th of rest, then a period of time and then God picks up his work again and there is a 8th, 9th, 10th day and so on. I used to have a real problem with this part and it turned me from Christianity for a long time because it meant incest. Then someone showed me this and in doing so, opened my eyes to see it was done without incest. That made a world of difference for me. I am still young in this journey of the Bible but this information gave me a fresh start. Just for the heck of it, I used to be so anti-Christian it wasn't funny. I had all the right answers to all the contriversial questions till I met someone that had all the right questions to all my answers. Yeah I know, why would a God so powerful make a man from mud and a woman from that man and then get angry when they behaved like man and woman. Why would God put two fuzzy bunnies in velociraptor nest. Why does God only need 144,000 and what happens to all the others besides hell. And on and on and on, good God don't get me started. All I know is once this point was made clear to me and I got it, everything else started falling into place. Sure I still have some questions and quite alot does not make any sence at all to me. But i learned through this one understanding, other understandings have started to happen. Have I succumbed to the 2000 year old brainwashing? Time will tell. I really don't see it like that anymore. Some things in the Bible may never make rational or scientific sense to me. I don't have all the answers, all though I used to think I did. Jesus said,"To those who have more shall be given unto them and to those who have not, more shall be taken from them". I used to think this was talking about materialism but it is not. He was speaking about faith. In looking at Gen 1 and 2 it seems there is some room for interpretation. However I do not get your point about the mist and God not making it rain yet. I think this is one of those things that someone either gets or doesn't get. When did God decide incest wasn't ok anymore? Gen 1 states that God made man. Gen 2 states God made Adam. Lets go here...Cain is Eve's first child. Cain went to Nod to take a wife. How could there be other people for him to take a wife if he was the first born. Do we want to go into the part about Cain being the spawn of Satan? I don't think the tree was correctly represented by an apple, it should have been a cherry. LOL. Cain and Abel were twins by two seperate fathers...Cain being from Satan and Abel from Adam.

 

[Shogun]

considering the incest found, otherwise, in the Old testement I'm not sure that it's really necessary to require the first and second chapters of Genesis to address different time frames. Indeed, the bible is a minefield full of potential variations of interpretation. I, myself, am no believer so I have no reason to insist that mine is the correct interpretation. That being said, I would have to ask, is it only the potential of Incest in Eden the reason why you believe ch1 and ch2 are relating different tales? if so, might I suggest the following:

While incest was clearly against the law of Moses there are more than a few examples of such. Perhaps each circumstance was recorded for historic reference rather than validation. Even so, the Laws of Moses were still given unto the people by a MAN, not a god. WHEN DID GOD EVER DECLARE ANYTHING ABOUT INCEST? Moses wasn't the first to make the same claims. Now, christians are required to believe that Moses got his marching orders from god much like Mormons think about their patriarch and every other group of dogma followers think about their version of Moses. My atheist argument is that the Law of Moses was a direct reflection of the culture of jews that he was leading. Indeed, the worship of the golden calf indicates that Moses has a motivation to bring back commandments that DIRECTLY reflected the behaviours of his people. If so, then the OT really doesn't have ANYTHING, besides traditions of man, to say about how GOD thought of the act of incest. Would the alpha and omega who just got done creating the world give a damn about human taboos if his new humans were sexually active? BEFORE eve ate the apple and THEN felt shame in their nudity? If GOD created Adam and Eve and saw that "everything was good" why would he have ignored the taboo of incest among his new humans? Is god similarly critical of incest among other created animals? Until Eve ate the apple were she and Adam supposed to behave like animals? I'm betting that incest was a sin declared by MAN instead of GOD given the absence of godly indication until MAN had something to say about it.

Now, regarding the 1st and 2nd chapters of Genesis I brought up the timeline of each because they match. In Ch 1 God creates the Heaven and the earth (1:1) before separating water from land (1:7) before seeding the earth (1:12) before creating man (1:26). Ch 2 indicates the creation of the earth (2:4) before the watering of the seeds which were in the created earth (2:5) before misting the land (2:6) before creating man (2:7). They match and there is no indication, beyond an aversion to a human taboo, that they are separate circumstances.

Finally, and I think most indicative, is Gen 2:1-3

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. 4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens



Again, as an Atheist, I have no dog in this race but I'm not quite seeing any indication from the bible of two seperate events that go on to sidestep the issue of incest. But, you are correct insomuch that interpretation varries. Hell, 2:4 leaves lots of room for evolution. The fact that the Alpha and Omega needed to REST seems to limit gods very supposed nature. The pluralistic "Our image" is a pandoras box of possibilities. I guess I was just curious about your interpretation because It's easier to accept the beliefs of the faithful when they think critically about what, exactly, they believe in rather than following suit and custom. I would imagine that an omnipotent god would not have missed the incest potential when only making two humans in eden. Then again, who says that the same god who just created the earth couldn't have also created enough variations in eve that Adams rib bone would not have to indicate incest? It's not like eve was the product of sexual reproduction, eh? If anything, Eve is more of a CLONE produced by asexual budding.


For what it's worth, I'm not trying to change your mind at all. I have my own opinions regarding the creation myth and the specific things mentioned in the origin tale. I'm betting that the tree of knowledge allagory is a direct relfaction of the point where an evolving human stopped being merely an animal and started using reason instead of just instinct.

 

[Lookout]

considering the incest found, otherwise, in the Old testement I'm not sure that it's really necessary to require the first and second chapters of Genesis to address different time frames. Indeed, the bible is a minefield full of potential variations of interpretation. I, myself, am no believer so I have no reason to insist that mine is the correct interpretation. That being said, I would have to ask, is it only the potential of Incest in Eden the reason why you believe ch1 and ch2 are relating different tales? if so, might I suggest the following:

While incest was clearly against the law of Moses there are more than a few examples of such. Perhaps each circumstance was recorded for historic reference rather than validation. Even so, the Laws of Moses were still given unto the people by a MAN, not a god. WHEN DID GOD EVER DECLARE ANYTHING ABOUT INCEST? Moses wasn't the first to make the same claims. Now, christians are required to believe that Moses got his marching orders from god much like Mormons think about their patriarch and every other group of dogma followers think about their version of Moses. My atheist argument is that the Law of Moses was a direct reflection of the culture of jews that he was leading. Indeed, the worship of the golden calf indicates that Moses has a motivation to bring back commandments that DIRECTLY reflected the behaviours of his people. If so, then the OT really doesn't have ANYTHING, besides traditions of man, to say about how GOD thought of the act of incest. Would the alpha and omega who just got done creating the world give a damn about human taboos if his new humans were sexually active? BEFORE eve ate the apple and THEN felt shame in their nudity? If GOD created Adam and Eve and saw that "everything was good" why would he have ignored the taboo of incest among his new humans? Is god similarly critical of incest among other created animals? Until Eve ate the apple were she and Adam supposed to behave like animals? I'm betting that incest was a sin declared by MAN instead of GOD given the absence of godly indication until MAN had something to say about it.

Now, regarding the 1st and 2nd chapters of Genesis I brought up the timeline of each because they match. In Ch 1 God creates the Heaven and the earth (1:1) before separating water from land (1:7) before seeding the earth (1:12) before creating man (1:26). Ch 2 indicates the creation of the earth (2:4) before the watering of the seeds which were in the created earth (2:5) before misting the land (2:6) before creating man (2:7). They match and there is no indication, beyond an aversion to a human taboo, that they are separate circumstances.

Finally, and I think most indicative, is Gen 2:1-3

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. 4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens



Again, as an Atheist, I have no dog in this race but I'm not quite seeing any indication from the bible of two seperate events that go on to sidestep the issue of incest. But, you are correct insomuch that interpretation varries. Hell, 2:4 leaves lots of room for evolution. The fact that the Alpha and Omega needed to REST seems to limit gods very supposed nature. The pluralistic "Our image" is a pandoras box of possibilities. I guess I was just curious about your interpretation because It's easier to accept the beliefs of the faithful when they think critically about what, exactly, they believe in rather than following suit and custom. I would imagine that an omnipotent god would not have missed the incest potential when only making two humans in eden. Then again, who says that the same god who just created the earth couldn't have also created enough variations in eve that Adams rib bone would not have to indicate incest? It's not like eve was the product of sexual reproduction, eh? If anything, Eve is more of a CLONE produced by asexual budding.


For what it's worth, I'm not trying to change your mind at all. I have my own opinions regarding the creation myth and the specific things mentioned in the origin tale. I'm betting that the tree of knowledge allagory is a direct relfaction of the point where an evolving human stopped being merely an animal and started using reason instead of just instinct.

Well...I will respect the fact that you are atheist. I'll be honest and say I would find it too exhausting to try and change your mind. I never was atheist. Even though I was Anti-Christ, I still believed in God and creationism but from a more scientific point of view. I guess we will all find out in the end. Just to give something to ponder. Leviticus Chapter 18 is where God speaks to Moses and tells him that you shall not incest. To put it in a nutshell, this is what I think...God did the 7 days. In that time he made man Gen 1. Then he made Adam & eve chapter 2. The incest would take place if he did not make other people before Adam & Eve. Not from the rib bone. The tree in the garden of good and evil wasn't an actual apple. It was Satan talking Eve into having sex. The first thing she did after comming(no pun intended) from the tree was have sex with Adam. They have two kids..Cain and Abel. Cain is the seed of satan and Abel is the seed of Adam. That is why Cain slew Abel. God took favor with Abel and not Cain. It is also why God was pissed at Eve. The first "Man" God made did not have souls. Adam was the first "Man" God gave a soul to. Cain went to Nod and took a wife because there were already people before Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel. The decendants of Cain were and are the Kenites. Cain was the spawn of satan. Eventually Eve has another child by Adam named Seth which begins the lineage to Noah. God found favor and Grace with Noah because he was not a Kenite. He then tried to wipe out all the bad seed with the flood. The reason God was so pissed is because he gave Adam a soul, which in turn gave Eve a soul. Any Children comming from her would have a soul be it from Adam or from Satan. Any children of Cain would be a soul decendant of Satan. THats why God was so pissed and tried to kill all the Kenites with the flood.

 

[Steerpike]

So everything would have been cool if God had made Adam and Eve so that they couldn't have kids...

or if He wouldn't have created Satan...

or if He wouldn't have put the tree (literally or figuratively) in the garden...

or if He wouldn't have created Eve to be so susceptible to temptation...

or if He wouldn't have created Adam to be so susceptible to temptation...

etc.

He is strangely short-sighted for an omniscient being.

 

[Lookout]

So everything would have been cool if God had made Adam and Eve so that they couldn't have kids...

or if He wouldn't have created Satan...

or if He wouldn't have put the tree (literally or figuratively) in the garden...

or if He wouldn't have created Eve to be so susceptible to temptation...

or if He wouldn't have created Adam to be so susceptible to temptation...

etc.

He is strangely short-sighted for an omniscient being.

God even admitted he made a mistake. 2 years ago you would be preeching to the choir. I don't know the answer to that or many other points that can be made about how it all goes and how some of it just seems like...WHAT??? Without it all going that way though, it would have not led to the lineage to Christ. I just know that for me, this was a milestone breakthrough. Since I have come back to Christ and tried to find the answers to the big "?" I am happier. Life seems a little easier. I like the feeling I get believing in God and Christ. It has made me a better person. I play well with others for the most part, and I am getting better and better. I have a long way to go and I am not perfect by any means, nor do I think I will ever be perfect or have all the answers. Thanks for everyone being nice and respectful and not turning this into a pissing match. Looking at my other posts, one of two things are true...I either have a long way to go or I am part Kenite. Look, I am not perfect. I guess I owe Taomon an apology for my actions.................

 

[Lookout]

Thats another thing believing in God and Christ does for me...It makes me look at myself, my actions and my behavior and it allows me the oppertunity to try and correct those mistakes. Maybe someday I will be good enough that I won't have to apologize cause I won't make some of those mistakes to begin with. Besides that it just seems really moral and wholesome and keeps me out of bad places with bad people doing bad things.

So Taomon, in reflecting on my behavior toward you and calling you a child hater...I am sorry. I am sure you really don't hate children. I am sorry I assassinated your character.