Adam's Sin

[OpheliaGinger]

Hey, why are they disparaging poor Adam anyway? It was the tramp Eve that first sinned.

Poor Adam was just led astray by the woman he trusted, he couldn't think she was evil.

 

See where following your _____ will get you..

 

 

Actually, the first human sin was committed by Lilith who refused to only have sex in the missionary position.

[StevoMuso]

 

IF anyone picks up 'the word of God' what comes out but their OWN reflections? Certainly doesn't mean THAT is God now does it, thank GOD.

 

I believe in 'the God' of 'personal reflections' (see lower left in my posts) cause that is THE GOD that I can actually see and dialog with.

 

enjoy!

 

squint

Okay Squint - here is a direct question for you: Do you believe in God? Yes or No. Another one: Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God? Yes or No please - I'm not sure what the "lower left" in your posts means, so please give us a point of reference.

[squint]

 

IF anyone picks up 'the word of God' what comes out but their OWN reflections? Certainly doesn't mean THAT is God now does it, thank GOD.

 

I believe in 'the God' of 'personal reflections' (see lower left in my posts) cause that is THE GOD that I can actually see and dialog with.

 

enjoy!

 

squint

Okay Squint - here is a direct question for you: Do you believe in God? Yes or No. Another one: Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God? Yes or No please - I'm not sure what the "lower left" in your posts means, so please give us a point of reference.

 

I believe in the God of personal reflections, as noted prior and as noted in the bottom line far left.

[Sconnor]

 

IF anyone picks up 'the word of God' what comes out but their OWN reflections? Certainly doesn't mean THAT is God now does it, thank GOD.

 

I believe in 'the God' of 'personal reflections' (see lower left in my posts) cause that is THE GOD that I can actually see and dialog with.

 

enjoy!

 

squint

Okay Squint - here is a direct question for you: Do you believe in God? Yes or No. Another one: Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God? Yes or No please - I'm not sure what the "lower left" in your posts means, so please give us a point of reference.

 

I believe in the God of personal reflections, as noted prior and as noted in the bottom line far left.

 

So you look in the mirror and pretend you're talking to god?

 

And why so evasive?

 

Did you not understand the point blank questions presented to you by stevomuso -- because you really never made yourself clear.

 

They were numbered and everything.

 

Please try again and answer each question thoroughly and please clarify, clarify, clarify.

 

Thank you.

 

--S.

[squint]

Okay Squint - here is a direct question for you: Do you believe in God? Yes or No. Another one: Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God? Yes or No please - I'm not sure what the "lower left" in your posts means, so please give us a point of reference.

 

So you look in the mirror and pretend you're talking to god?

 

A voice that will be so much dust in the wind in a few short years, however you care to reflect on that.

And why so evasive?

 

Evasive is only in the eye of the beholder.

Did you not understand the point blank questions presented to you by stevomuso -- because you really never made yourself clear.

 

Clear to what? An imposition of another reflection?

 

I do find interest in the dynamic of two diametrically opposed thoughts being placed along side each other and seeing which way the reflectors lean, if that is your question. Not much different than any good drama.

They were numbered and everything.

 

Please try again and answer each question thoroughly and please clarify, clarify, clarify.

 

If you're asking me to climb inside someone else's reflection box, it won't be happening anytime soon.

 

enjoy!

 

s

[Sconnor]

Okay Squint - here is a direct question for you: Do you believe in God? Yes or No. Another one: Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God? Yes or No please - I'm not sure what the "lower left" in your posts means, so please give us a point of reference.

 

So you look in the mirror and pretend you're talking to god?

 

A voice that will be so much dust in the wind in a few short years, however you care to reflect on that.

And why so evasive?

 

Evasive is only in the eye of the beholder.

Did you not understand the point blank questions presented to you by stevomuso -- because you really never made yourself clear.

 

Clear to what? An imposition of another reflection?

 

I do find interest in the dynamic of two diametrically opposed thoughts being placed along side each other and seeing which way the reflectors lean, if that is your question. Not much different than any good drama.

They were numbered and everything.

 

Please try again and answer each question thoroughly and please clarify, clarify, clarify.

 

If you're asking me to climb inside someone else's reflection box, it won't be happening anytime soon.

 

enjoy!

 

s

 

In the future you might as well just put your forefinger between your upper and lower lip and make quick up and down movements while you babble ambiguities -- BBbBbbBBBbbBBBbbbBbbBbBbBbBbbBBbBbBbB!

 

It makes the same amount of sense; you scrambled-brained, equivocator.

 

First day they let you have Internet privileges at Bellevue mental hospital?

 

--S.

[Kathlene]

Okay Squint - here is a direct question for you: Do you believe in God? Yes or No. Another one: Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God? Yes or No please - I'm not sure what the "lower left" in your posts means, so please give us a point of reference.

 

So you look in the mirror and pretend you're talking to god?

 

A voice that will be so much dust in the wind in a few short years, however you care to reflect on that.

And why so evasive?

 

Evasive is only in the eye of the beholder.

Did you not understand the point blank questions presented to you by stevomuso -- because you really never made yourself clear.

 

Clear to what? An imposition of another reflection?

 

I do find interest in the dynamic of two diametrically opposed thoughts being placed along side each other and seeing which way the reflectors lean, if that is your question. Not much different than any good drama.

They were numbered and everything.

 

Please try again and answer each question thoroughly and please clarify, clarify, clarify.

 

If you're asking me to climb inside someone else's reflection box, it won't be happening anytime soon.

 

enjoy!

 

s

 

In the future you might as well just put your forefinger between your upper and lower lip and make quick up and down movements while you babble ambiguities -- BBbBbbBBBbbBBBbbbBbbBbBbBbBbbBBbBbBbB!

 

It makes the same amount of sense; you scrambled-brained, equivocator.

 

First day they let you have Internet privileges at Bellevue mental hospital?

 

--S.

 

 

...and I thought I got it hard under sconnor's scathing reviews, hehe

 

This made me laugh so hard..

[squint]

[spew]

 

You'll have to excuse me for even thinking that ex-christians would have any counter in fact to actual subject matter and prefer to spew their own forms of subjective baloney as replacements to civil discourse.

[par4dcourse]

You'll have to excuse me for even thinking that ex-christians would have any counter in fact to actual subject matter and prefer to spew their own forms of subjective baloney as replacements to civil discourse.

 

I don't try to have civil discourse with a babbling baby, either. You prefer not to answer my and Sconner's direct questions as to your motives for being here, and that sets off troll alarms in a lot of us.

And I'm getting damn sick of.....

 

 

...enjoy

[squint]

You'll have to excuse me for even thinking that ex-christians would have any counter in fact to actual subject matter and prefer to spew their own forms of subjective baloney as replacements to civil discourse.

 

I don't try to have civil discourse with a babbling baby, either. You prefer not to answer my and Sconner's direct questions as to your motives for being here, and that sets off troll alarms in a lot of us.

And I'm getting damn sick of.....

 

...enjoy

 

You think blowing expletives and insults somehow 'qualifies' you as a legit ex-christian?

 

What the IS a christian anyway? Somebody you pound into a some imbecilic GOD hole of your own device that YOU made by force and intimidation so you can jump on 'em for your daily mind toy and pat yerself on the back for how schmart U R? l o l. People get where they got for 'reasons' and they get 'out' the same way, for 'reasons.'

 

Where is your formal declaration of what an [ex] christian is? Somebody that believes there is no value in anything but yet another subjectively jacked up standard that everybody must salute to prove themselves? How then ARE YOU one whit different than THEM?

 

Answer: You AREN'T. and I ain't salutin' nobodys BOX.

 

For the record I could care less WHAT you believe or DON'T as long as you stay of my toes. IF you think that somehow makes me a 'CHRISTIAN' marauder I'd suggest the marauder is in your own paranoid head trying to pin yourself on me for more self imposed/inflicted imbecile fun fodder. I don't play well with anybody else's box of ANY FORM slammed over my head, and no matter what 'label' it has on it. It's all the same MANIPULATION method by any measure, christian, non or EX.

 

Your slam box don't OWN anybody but U.

 

enjoy!

 

squint

[Rev. Dr. Sparki Hooker]

and that sets off troll alarms in a lot of us.

And I'm getting damn sick of.....

 

...enjoy

 

You think blowing expletives and insults somehow 'qualifies' you as a legit ex-christian?

 

 

 

i lold

[StevoMuso]

Your slam box don't OWN anybody but U.

No, Squint, you are new to our forum and we would merely like to get to know you. We are NOT trying to force you into a box or make you salute anything. All we want is simply to get you to introduce yourself to us in words (or terminology) that have meaning we can relate to. If you use terms (like "God of reflections") that only you (and perhaps your therapist) understand, all we are asking is a bit of clarity. Tell us what you mean ... in English we can all understand please.

 

If you cannot offer this kind of introduction to us then ... ding-ding ... troll-warning.

 

So Squint, please introduce yourself to us properly. To me you sound like a Christian, with the veiled understanding, lack of knowledge (e.g. "Ex-Christian is? Somebody [who] believes there is no value in anything". Only Christians think this) and loud shouting/ranting/ad hominum's in your posts. If you are a Christian then it is not a bad thing, necessarily, because Christians are welcome here as long as they offer fun, informative debate and can put up with a bit of friendly banter.

[Casey]

As to the topic, if one may return to that for a moment, here's a question. It's called Adam's Sin, right? However, who was the first to eat the Forbidden Fruit? (I know everyone says it was an apple, but in fact the fruit isn't named at all).

 

Well now, as I remember the story, it was Eve who first ate the Forbidden Fruit, so surely it was Eve's sin, not Adam's? Another question. What if Adam had refused to eat the damn thing? What was God to do then, throw Eve out of the Garden of Eden and allow Adam to stay? He'd be in a funny old position then, wouldn't he? Men would be immortal and women mortal, and that would be just the start of his problems.

 

I should say that those who do think would regard the story of the Fall of Man as but an allegory of what happens to everyone in this life. It is very simple, everyone is born into this world as a someone's child. Hopefully (although of course not always) they are children within a family for a while, then they become adolescents and then adults. At some stage they lose the innocence they had as children, and that, one would think, is the whole point of the story.

 

Once they (children) lose their innocence and become first adolescents and then adults, they leave the Garden of Eden so to speak, and thereafter it's "Another day, another dollar, roll on Death". And that, whether one likes it or not, is life, unless one wishes to see some deeper meaning in this old fable.

Casey

[Guest I Love Dog]

Hey all, I am just putting a story in here by Max Lucado about the sin of Adam. I've read it and thought it was pretty powerful. Wanted to see any opinions on it. !

 

The Choice

 

by Max Lucado

 

He placed one scoop of clay upon another until a form lay lifeless on the ground.

All of the Garden’s inhabitants paused to witness the event. Hawks hovered. Giraffes stretched. Trees bowed. Butterflies paused on petals and watched.

“You will love me, nature,” God said. “I made you that way. You will obey me, universe. For you were designed to do so. You will reflect my glory, skies, for that is how you were created. But this one will be like me. This one will be able to choose.”

All were silent as the Creator reached into himself and removed something yet unseen. A seed. “It’s called ‘choice.’ The seed of choice.”

Creation stood in silence and gazed upon the lifeless form.

An angel spoke, “But what if he … ”

“What if he chooses not to love?” the Creator finished. “Come, I will show you.”

Unbound by today, God and the angel walked into the realm of tomorrow.

“There, see the fruit of the seed of choice, both the sweet and the bitter.”

The angel gasped at what he saw. Spontaneous love. Voluntary devotion. Chosen tenderness. Never had he seen anything like these. He felt the love of the Adams. He heard the joy of Eve and her daughters. He saw the food and the burdens shared. He absorbed the kindness and marveled at the warmth.

“Heaven has never seen such beauty, my Lord. Truly, this is your greatest creation.”

“Ah, but you’ve only seen the sweet. Now witness the bitter.”

A stench enveloped the pair. The angel turned in horror and proclaimed, “What is it?”

The Creator spoke only one word: “Selfishness.”

The angel stood speechless as they passed through centuries of repugnance. Never had he seen such filth. Rotten hearts. Ruptured promises. Forgotten loyalties. Children of the creation wandering blindly in lonely labyrinths.

“This is the result of choice?” the angel asked.

“Yes.”

“They will forget you?”

“Yes.”

“They will reject you?”

“Yes.”

“They will never come back?”

“Some will. Most won’t.”

“What will it take to make them listen?”

The Creator walked on in time, further and further into the future, until he stood by a tree. A tree that would be fashioned into a cradle. Even then he could smell the hay that would surround him.

With another step into the future, he paused before another tree. It stood alone, a stubborn ruler of a bald hill. The trunk was thick, and the wood was strong. Soon it would be cut. Soon it would be trimmed. Soon it would be mounted on the stony brow of another hill. And soon he would be hung on it.

He felt the wood rub against a back he did not yet wear.

“Will you go down there?” the angel asked.

“I will.”

“Is there no other way?”

“There is not.”

“Wouldn’t it be easier to not plant the seed? Wouldn’t it be easier to not give the choice?”

“It would,” the Creator spoke slowly. “But to remove the choice is to remove the love.”

He looked around the hill and foresaw a scene. Three figures hung on three crosses. Arms spread. Heads fallen forward. They moaned with the wind.

Men clad in soldiers’ garb sat on the ground near the trio. They played games in the dirt and laughed.

Men clad in religion stood off to one side. They smiled. Arrogant, cocky. They had protected God, they thought, by killing this false one.

Women clad in sorrow huddled at the foot of the hill. Speechless. Faces tear streaked. Eyes downward. One put her arm around another and tried to lead her away. She wouldn’t leave. “I will stay,” she said softly. “I will stay.”

All heaven stood to fight. All nature rose to rescue. All eternity poised to protect. But the Creator gave no command.

“It must be done … ,” he said, and withdrew.

But as he stepped back in time, he heard the cry that he would someday scream: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34) He wrenched at tomorrow’s agony.

The angel spoke again. “It would be less painful … ”

The Creator interrupted softly. “But it wouldn’t be love.”

They stepped into the Garden again. The Maker looked earnestly at the clay creation. A monsoon of love swelled up within him. He had died for the creation before he had made him. God’s form bent over the sculptured face and breathed. Dust stirred on the lips of the new one. The chest rose, cracking the red mud. The cheeks fleshened. A finger moved. And an eye opened.

But more incredible than the moving of the flesh was the stirring of the spirit. Those who could see the unseen gasped.

Perhaps it was the wind who said it first. Perhaps what the star saw that moment is what has made it blink ever since. Maybe it was left to an angel to whisper it:

“It looks like … it appears so much like … it is him!”

The angel wasn’t speaking of the face, the features, or the body. He was looking inside—at the soul.

“It’s eternal!” gasped another.

Within the man, God had placed a divine seed. A seed of his self. The God of might had created earth’s mightiest. The Creator had created, not a creature, but another creator. And the One who had chosen to love had created one who could love in return.

Now it’s our choice.

From In the Eye of the Storm

Copyright (Thomas Nelson, 1997) Max Lucado

 

What a heap of crap! "Adam", "angels", "god".

 

If that's the best that religion can produce, then I'll go eat Yahweh's testicles!

[Guest I Love Dog]

You'll have to excuse me for even thinking that ex-christians would have any counter in fact to actual subject matter and prefer to spew their own forms of subjective baloney as replacements to civil discourse.

 

I don't try to have civil discourse with a babbling baby, either. You prefer not to answer my and Sconner's direct questions as to your motives for being here, and that sets off troll alarms in a lot of us.

And I'm getting damn sick of.....

 

...enjoy

 

You think blowing expletives and insults somehow 'qualifies' you as a legit ex-christian?

 

What the IS a christian anyway? Somebody you pound into a some imbecilic GOD hole of your own device that YOU made by force and intimidation so you can jump on 'em for your daily mind toy and pat yerself on the back for how schmart U R? l o l. People get where they got for 'reasons' and they get 'out' the same way, for 'reasons.'

 

Where is your formal declaration of what an [ex] christian is? Somebody that believes there is no value in anything but yet another subjectively jacked up standard that everybody must salute to prove themselves? How then ARE YOU one whit different than THEM?

 

Answer: You AREN'T. and I ain't salutin' nobodys BOX.

 

For the record I could care less WHAT you believe or DON'T as long as you stay of my toes. IF you think that somehow makes me a 'CHRISTIAN' marauder I'd suggest the marauder is in your own paranoid head trying to pin yourself on me for more self imposed/inflicted imbecile fun fodder. I don't play well with anybody else's box of ANY FORM slammed over my head, and no matter what 'label' it has on it. It's all the same MANIPULATION method by any measure, christian, non or EX.

 

Your slam box don't OWN anybody but U.

 

enjoy!

 

squint

 

Squint, please stay, we need you!

[Vigile]

Kathlene is a human being, and, overall, a decent one. Kathlene is a pretty average example of the human race in the thinking, feeling, and behaving departments. Most people here are pretty average and unspecial in the thinking and feeling and behaving departments.

 

Phanta

 

No one said she wasn't. What I see is people responding to the shined shit she tried to serve us on a platter, they didn't tell her she was a bad person. I for one happen to think what she believes is harmful, damaging and the cause of a whole lot of pain in our past. It doesn't deserve a free ride. If she wishes to come here and shoot the breeze with us I'll be more than happy to accommodate. If she chooses to come here and share 'another point of view' then she should expect to get some strong opinions handed back.

[Vigile]

Kathlene, I won't add extra critique, but I have a suggestion.

 

If you do believe there has to be some sort of divine force, I think you can do much better than Christianity, with it's cranky abusive god Yahweh.

 

I suggest becoming a Wiccan. All the spirituality, with none of the guilt. And if you'd prefer to be a solitary practicioner, you might find this book helpful:http://www.amazon.com/Wicca-Solitary-Practitioner-Authors-Shadows/dp/0875421180

 

I care about you Kathlene, but think your belief system is very bad for your well being.

 

She won't go for it because despite her claims that she is choosing xianity because it makes her feel all tingly the truth is she thinks it's the truth and as such she fears her loving god will burn her if she chooses another form of spiritualism.

[Legion]

... the truth is she thinks it's the truth...

I think it's a bit presumptuous to claim to know the mind of another.

[Vigile]

... the truth is she thinks it's the truth...

I think it's a bit presumptuous to claim to know the mind of another.

 

I've gathered as much from her posts. She is free to correct me if I'm wrong.

[Legion]

She is free to correct me if I'm wrong.

True enough I suppose.

[squint]

Your slam box don't OWN anybody but U.

No, Squint, you are new to our forum and we would merely like to get to know you. We are NOT trying to force you into a box or make you salute anything. All we want is simply to get you to introduce yourself to us in words (or terminology) that have meaning we can relate to. If you use terms (like "God of reflections") that only you (and perhaps your therapist) understand, all we are asking is a bit of clarity. Tell us what you mean ... in English we can all understand please.

 

You keep your 'terms' and I'll keep mine.

If you cannot offer this kind of introduction to us then ... ding-ding ... troll-warning.

 

Trolling for you to be able to keep your own box? Do you take offence in that sight?

So Squint, please introduce yourself to us properly. To me you sound like a Christian, with the veiled understanding, lack of knowledge (e.g. "Ex-Christian is? Somebody [who] believes there is no value in anything". Only Christians think this) and loud shouting/ranting/ad hominum's in your posts. If you are a Christian then it is not a bad thing, necessarily, because Christians are welcome here as long as they offer fun, informative debate and can put up with a bit of friendly banter.

 

Yeah, focus on a typo or a type size, color or even a comma or a period.

 

That ought to be enough ammo for anyone to let er rip.

[bdp]

squint, you keep your terms, and no one's going to play with you. If that's okay with you, that's fine, I'm just saying...

[par4dcourse]

...drivel snipped....

 

You forgot to tell us to....

 

 

 

 

enjoy!

[Phanta]

Kathlene is a human being, and, overall, a decent one. Kathlene is a pretty average example of the human race in the thinking, feeling, and behaving departments. Most people here are pretty average and unspecial in the thinking and feeling and behaving departments.

 

Phanta

 

No one said she wasn't.

 

I disagree, Vigil. A clear statement was made about Kathlene's mental capacity and mental health; her retreat was written specifically in response to that post. Because such comments can be harmful to sentient beings, and that seemed to be the case here, I felt mitigating damage by offering my own very different opinion of her mental state was the right thing to do.

 

Kathlene's didn't retreat because she is Christian. She retreated because nasty, personal attacks hurt. They're fucking mean.

 

Phanta

[bdp]

Kathlene is a human being, and, overall, a decent one. Kathlene is a pretty average example of the human race in the thinking, feeling, and behaving departments. Most people here are pretty average and unspecial in the thinking and feeling and behaving departments.

 

Phanta

 

No one said she wasn't.

 

I disagree, Vigil. A clear statement was made about Kathlene's mental capacity and mental health; her retreat was written specifically in response to that post. Because such comments can be harmful to sentient beings, and that seemed to be the case here, I felt mitigating damage by offering my own very different opinion of her mental state was the right thing to do.

 

Kathlene's didn't retreat because she is Christian. She retreated because nasty, personal attacks hurt. They're fucking mean.

 

Phanta

 

Completely agree.