God Is A Liar

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I am going to hell.  I am going to hell because Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and by so doing, brought Original Sin into the world.  I am going to hell because God, in His infinite mercy, sacrificed His only begotten Son in order to redeem me from eternal conscious torment and I have rejected that sacrifice based upon a lack of evidence that it really happened as well as upon the lack of logic such a proposition holds.  Thus, as an unrepentant apostate, born into sin and unwashed in the blood of the lamb, I am going to hell.

 

Or so I am told.

 

But what were Adam and Eve told?  What instruction did the Almighty offer them concerning the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?  What cautions were put into place to ensure they would make the right decision?

 

Let’s take a look at this story again to see if it truly agrees with Christian doctrine:

 

¹⁶ And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

¹⁷ But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

¹⁸ And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

 

²¹ And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

²² And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

 

²⁵ And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

 

¹ Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

² And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

³ But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

⁴ And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

⁵ For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

⁶ And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

⁷ And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

⁸ And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

⁹ And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

Genesis chapters 2 and 3.

 

God told Adam that he was allowed to eat from all the trees in the Garden except for the tree of knowledge.  God then declares that on the day Adam ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, he would surely die.

 

As it turns out, this was a lie.

 

And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.  Genesis 5:5

 

So it is clear that Adam did not die in the day that he ate of the fruit; rather he lived nearly a thousand years.  “But a day is like a thousand years with god!” one might say.  While it is true that St. Paul made such a pronouncement, it does not square off with the text of Genesis, which makes plain what a day was:

 

And the evening and the morning were the first day.  Genesis 1:5

 

Thus it is clear that God lied to Adam.  God made it clear that an evening and a morning constituted a day; then claimed that Adam would die the same day he ate the fruit.  But the text is lucid concerning how long Adam lived.

 

Next, God created a woman for Adam and the woman started talking to a serpent.  The serpent asked the woman about the fruit of the tree of knowledge and she responded that they were not to eat it, nor even touch it, on pain of death.  The serpent then explained to Eve that she had the opportunity of a lifetime in front of her.  She had the chance to know the difference between good and evil.

 

The implication here is staggering.  God had demanded that Adam and Eve choose between good and evil without even understanding the difference.  Moreover, he had placed the fate of their lives upon them making the right choice, because, so far as Adam and Eve knew, they would die if they ate the fruit.  God had clearly withheld vital information from those he expected to choose good over evil.

 

So, Eve made the choice to eat of the fruit.  She, then, took some to Adam, who also ate of it.  In the cool of the day, God came to find them hiding in shame because of what they had done.  God was very angry and pronounced curses on all parties involved, including pain in childbirth, toilsome labor, and ultimately, death.

 

What is completely missing from the story is the idea of Original Sin, upon which the concept of eternal conscious torment is built.  This is important and should be questioned thoroughly.

 

If, in fact, eating the fruit would introduce Original Sin into the world, why would God not have mentioned it?  Why would God not have explained to Adam and Eve that the fates of their children hung on them not eating the fruit, given that to make the wrong choice would cause all of their descendents to be born into sin?  How could God expect Adam and Eve to make an informed decision when he was withholding so many of the details?

 

Why would God’s only warning concern death (and even that was a lie)?

 

Moreover, if the fate of all those who would, in future, choose not to follow God, be everlasting torture in hell, then why would God not have provided that information as a stern warning?  Surely, God, who is omniscient, knew that bringing Original Sin into the world would condemn the majority of his “children” to an eternity of torment and suffering.  He allegedly had already created hell for the devil and his fallen angels.  This information would have prevented untold millions from being cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.  Why would He not provide it to those making the choice?

 

It is clear that God expected Adam and Eve to make the most critical choice in all of human history.  The fate of all humanity rested upon the decision they would make.  The entire population of earth, since the dawn of creation, stood to face eternal damnation or everlasting bliss depending upon which choice this ill-advised couple would make.

 

Yet, rather than provide all of the facts, all of the warnings, and all of the details needed to make a thoroughly informed and educated choice, God blatantly lied, withheld vital information, and set His creation up for ultimate failure.

 

Then He blamed the victims; and cursed them.

 

Which brings the final question:  Is the Christian doctrine false, or is God simply the biggest liar there ever was?

 

 

 

All texts taken from http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/

[mymistake]

We can see how one religion was built upon another.  The top layer is Paul's Christianity.  That was built upon Ezra's Jerusalem Temple cult.  And Ezra built his theology on even older religions.  Ezra did a poor job of editing them together.

[amateur]

How could god have expected Adam and Eve to make an informed decision about anything since they were the first and only humans at that point, and would have in no way understood concepts like death, sin, heaven, hell, children, nakedness etc?  At that point, there was no religion, no bible, no understanding of morality, no concept of the torture or hell or the bliss of paradise.  They had yet to feel pain or experience toil.  None of those words or concepts would have had ANY meaning to them whatsoever.  God would've been warning them about the tree, and all they would have heard was, "Blah blah blah tree blah blah blahbiddyblah."

 

"And they knew they were naked"!  I've always thought that was funny!  Every animal god created was running around naked; how would they know what the embarrassing bits were?  And where did they find something to sew their fig leaves together with?  Even as a kid, I thought that was stupid.  I knew my parents saw each other naked every day in their bedroom while they got dressed and I could hear them talking all normal to each other while doing so.  You know why?  BECAUSE IT'S NORMAL!!!

 

Did you ever try to sew leaves together?  They rip easy.

[RipVanWinkle]

RNP: Oh, you haven't heard? The apologists have figured out what god meant by saying to Adam that he could surely die if he ate the fruit from the tree of good and evil: God

meant that Adam would die spiritually, not physically. Why did I miss that point all

these years? Maybe it's because the "spirit" is neither defined nor mentioned in the

Genesis description of the "fall". So Adam could not have known that god was speaking of the death of Adam' spirit since he didn't know he had one and god never

mentioned it to him.

 

This is just one more example of apologists' claims that they are interpreting

scriptures, when if fact they are adding their own amendments to it and claiming it was

what god said. Isn't that blasphemy? bill

 

Amateur: You beat me to it by 4 minutes. bill

[Pantophobia]

My first real moment as a skeptic: age 9, asking my Sunday School teacher why, if it was bad to eat of the fruit, God put the tree there in the first place, knowing they would. That seemed really unfair. My second real moment as a skeptic: even after Teacher's explanation, I thought that, if the boon was knowledge, I would have eaten the fruit, too. 

[par4dcourse]

Kudos Professor. Great post and thread.

[LukeExChristian]

i learned in church that they died "spiritually" and that jesus was the one who fixed there mistake. not that i believe it anymore

[pratt]

fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. some interprete it as discernment.

 

if adam cannot discern, then what is death to him? how can it be bad or good because adam would not comprehend

[Kris]

Good post--- it really makes one think! I too had issues with the Adam and Eve story. God always seemed like such a pretentious asshole to me.

[rain]

I have always wondered why god didn't encourage adam and eve to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. As parents do we not teach our children from day one, what is good and what is not?

[bornagainathiest]

The RedNeckProf wrote...

 

But what were Adam and Eve told?  What instruction did the Almighty offer them concerning the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?  What cautions were put into place to ensure they would make the right decision?

 

Let’s take a look at this story again to see if it truly agrees with Christian doctrine:

 

¹⁶ And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

¹⁷ But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

¹⁸ And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

 

²¹ And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

²² And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

 

²⁵ And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

 

¹ Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

² And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

³ But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

⁴ And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

⁵ For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

⁶ And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Good work Prof!

 

Here's additional evidence that God was the deceitful party in Genesis.

 

I've highlighted sections in verses 16 and 18. 

 

You'll note that before Eve was created from Adam's rib and before God declared that Adam shouldn't be alone, God commands only Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  Not Eve.  So, reasonably assuming that the events decribed in Genesis are happening in chronological order, God made sure that Eve never heard that command from His own lips.  God commands only Adam, not Eve.

.

.

.

Later, the serpent asks Eve what God said.

He doesn't lie.  He doesn't imply anything.  He simply asks her what God said about the tree of knowledge.  Now, because she wasn't there to actually hear what God said only to Adam, she gives the serpent a false and inaccurate report of God's words.  God didn't actually say they would die if they touched the fruit.  He said they would die on the day they ate it.  Not the same. 

 

Q.  So is anyone actually lying here?

A.  Yes.  But not the humans and not the serpent. 

 

Not Eve. 

She cannot lie.  She's still in a state perfect innocence.  A lie is different from an innocent mistake.  If she heard a garbled version of God's command from Adam, that's not her fault - that's down to Adam for not reporting what God told him correctly. 

 

Not Adam.  

He couldn't have lied to Eve about God's command, either.  He's in a perfect state of innocence too.  There was no subterfuge in Adam to cause him to lie to Eve.  However, he was fallible and could have given Eve a mistaken report about God's command.

 

Not the serpent. 

He's just asking Eve to tell him what God said about the trees in the garden of Eden.  Her only source of information about this was Adam.  Since Adam couldn't lie to her, either she misreported Adam's true account of God's command or she correctly reported Adam's garbled account of it.

 

That leaves only one other person who could have practiced deceit in Eden, before Adam and Eve ate the fruit and knew good and evil.  The same person who made sure that Eve didn't hear His warning about the tree of knowledge.  The same person who (supposedly) foreknew all things before be created anything.  The same person who put two innocents in a position of supreme responsibility and then blamed them for not foreseeing the consequences of their actions.   The same person who told Adam he would die on the day that he ate, even though Adam went on to live for nearly a thousand years.  The same person who knew about good and evil from get go.

.

.

.

.

Guess who?

.

.

.

Genesis 3 : 22, KJV.

²² And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

 

.

.

.

'nuff said?

 

Thanks,

 

BAA

 

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

RNP: Oh, you haven't heard? The apologists have figured out what god meant by saying to Adam that he could surely die if he ate the fruit from the tree of good and evil: God

meant that Adam would die spiritually, not physically. Why did I miss that point all

these years? Maybe it's because the "spirit" is neither defined nor mentioned in the

Genesis description of the "fall". So Adam could not have known that god was speaking of the death of Adam' spirit since he didn't know he had one and god never

mentioned it to him.

 

This is just one more example of apologists' claims that they are interpreting

scriptures, when if fact they are adding their own amendments to it and claiming it was

what god said. Isn't that blasphemy? bill

 

Amateur: You beat me to it by 4 minutes. bill

If it were meant to be taken as a "spiritual" death, then that would lead one to suspect that the entire story was meant to be interpreted as an allegory, not taken literally.  Where would that leave creationists?

[TheRedneckProfessor]

How could god have expected Adam and Eve to make an informed decision about anything since they were the first and only humans at that point, and would have in no way understood concepts like death, sin, heaven, hell, children, nakedness etc?  At that point, there was no religion, no bible, no understanding of morality, no concept of the torture or hell or the bliss of paradise.  They had yet to feel pain or experience toil.  None of those words or concepts would have had ANY meaning to them whatsoever.  God would've been warning them about the tree, and all they would have heard was, "Blah blah blah tree blah blah blahbiddyblah."

 

"And they knew they were naked"!  I've always thought that was funny!  Every animal god created was running around naked; how would they know what the embarrassing bits were?  And where did they find something to sew their fig leaves together with?  Even as a kid, I thought that was stupid.  I knew my parents saw each other naked every day in their bedroom while they got dressed and I could hear them talking all normal to each other while doing so.  You know why?  BECAUSE IT'S NORMAL!!!

 

Did you ever try to sew leaves together?  They rip easy.

But God allegedly walked with them in the cool of the day.  We are invited to believe that they had an intimate relationship with Him.  Surely, if He had given them any indication as to the true horror they would unleash by eating the fruit, they would have understood.  Except He didn't.  He kept them in the dark, the mad bastard.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

My first real moment as a skeptic: age 9, asking my Sunday School teacher why, if it was bad to eat of the fruit, God put the tree there in the first place, knowing they would. That seemed really unfair. My second real moment as a skeptic: even after Teacher's explanation, I thought that, if the boon was knowledge, I would have eaten the fruit, too. 

I think I was maybe 5 or 6 when I first asked my Sunday School teacher why it was that running in the hall made jesus cry, not sharing crayons made jesus cry, being mean to the new kid made jesus cry; but somehow beating him, putting a crown of thorns on him, and making him carry his cross made him go as silently as a lamb to slaughter.

[qadeshet]

If God had not wanted Adam and Eve to eat the fruit, then all he needed to do was to either put a guard next to the tree or simply not plant it there in the first place. They had no knowledge of right or wrong, or good and evil, until they ate the fruit. This is the paradox of the apple. Christians use faith to get past all the contradictions and inaccuracies in the Bible. Another word for faith is gullibility.

[Guest end3]

I am going to hell.  I am going to hell because Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and by so doing, brought Original Sin into the world.  I am going to hell because God, in His infinite mercy, sacrificed His only begotten Son in order to redeem me from eternal conscious torment and I have rejected that sacrifice based upon a lack of evidence that it really happened as well as upon the lack of logic such a proposition holds.  Thus, as an unrepentant apostate, born into sin and unwashed in the blood of the lamb, I am going to hell.

 

Or so I am told.

 

But what were Adam and Eve told?  What instruction did the Almighty offer them concerning the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?  What cautions were put into place to ensure they would make the right decision?

 

Let’s take a look at this story again to see if it truly agrees with Christian doctrine:

 

¹⁶ And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

¹⁷ But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

¹⁸ And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

 

²¹ And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

²² And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

 

²⁵ And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

 

¹ Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

² And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

³ But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

⁴ And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

⁵ For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

⁶ And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

⁷ And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

⁸ And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

⁹ And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

Genesis chapters 2 and 3.

 

God told Adam that he was allowed to eat from all the trees in the Garden except for the tree of knowledge.  God then declares that on the day Adam ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, he would surely die.

 

As it turns out, this was a lie.

 

And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.  Genesis 5:5

 

So it is clear that Adam did not die in the day that he ate of the fruit; rather he lived nearly a thousand years.  “But a day is like a thousand years with god!” one might say.  While it is true that St. Paul made such a pronouncement, it does not square off with the text of Genesis, which makes plain what a day was:

 

And the evening and the morning were the first day.  Genesis 1:5

 

Thus it is clear that God lied to Adam.  God made it clear that an evening and a morning constituted a day; then claimed that Adam would die the same day he ate the fruit.  But the text is lucid concerning how long Adam lived.

 

Next, God created a woman for Adam and the woman started talking to a serpent.  The serpent asked the woman about the fruit of the tree of knowledge and she responded that they were not to eat it, nor even touch it, on pain of death.  The serpent then explained to Eve that she had the opportunity of a lifetime in front of her.  She had the chance to know the difference between good and evil.

 

The implication here is staggering.  God had demanded that Adam and Eve choose between good and evil without even understanding the difference.  Moreover, he had placed the fate of their lives upon them making the right choice, because, so far as Adam and Eve knew, they would die if they ate the fruit.  God had clearly withheld vital information from those he expected to choose good over evil.

 

So, Eve made the choice to eat of the fruit.  She, then, took some to Adam, who also ate of it.  In the cool of the day, God came to find them hiding in shame because of what they had done.  God was very angry and pronounced curses on all parties involved, including pain in childbirth, toilsome labor, and ultimately, death.

 

What is completely missing from the story is the idea of Original Sin, upon which the concept of eternal conscious torment is built.  This is important and should be questioned thoroughly.

 

If, in fact, eating the fruit would introduce Original Sin into the world, why would God not have mentioned it?  Why would God not have explained to Adam and Eve that the fates of their children hung on them not eating the fruit, given that to make the wrong choice would cause all of their descendents to be born into sin?  How could God expect Adam and Eve to make an informed decision when he was withholding so many of the details?

 

Why would God’s only warning concern death (and even that was a lie)?

 

Moreover, if the fate of all those who would, in future, choose not to follow God, be everlasting torture in hell, then why would God not have provided that information as a stern warning?  Surely, God, who is omniscient, knew that bringing Original Sin into the world would condemn the majority of his “children” to an eternity of torment and suffering.  He allegedly had already created hell for the devil and his fallen angels.  This information would have prevented untold millions from being cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.  Why would He not provide it to those making the choice?

 

It is clear that God expected Adam and Eve to make the most critical choice in all of human history.  The fate of all humanity rested upon the decision they would make.  The entire population of earth, since the dawn of creation, stood to face eternal damnation or everlasting bliss depending upon which choice this ill-advised couple would make.

 

Yet, rather than provide all of the facts, all of the warnings, and all of the details needed to make a thoroughly informed and educated choice, God blatantly lied, withheld vital information, and set His creation up for ultimate failure.

 

Then He blamed the victims; and cursed them.

 

Which brings the final question:  Is the Christian doctrine false, or is God simply the biggest liar there ever was?

 

 

 

All texts taken from http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/

A lot to discuss at one time Prof, but if your up for it, I enjoy this discussion. Don't really think I should be here anymore, but that's my deal.

 

If you would like to discuss, then here's my opening comment.......don't know that it matters, but "IN that day thou shall surely die". Would have to rely on the word "in" and that one day is longer that our 24 hour day.....Regardless, there are some neat types in here to consider.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

I am going to hell.  I am going to hell because Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and by so doing, brought Original Sin into the world.  I am going to hell because God, in His infinite mercy, sacrificed His only begotten Son in order to redeem me from eternal conscious torment and I have rejected that sacrifice based upon a lack of evidence that it really happened as well as upon the lack of logic such a proposition holds.  Thus, as an unrepentant apostate, born into sin and unwashed in the blood of the lamb, I am going to hell.

 

Or so I am told.

 

But what were Adam and Eve told?  What instruction did the Almighty offer them concerning the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?  What cautions were put into place to ensure they would make the right decision?

 

Let’s take a look at this story again to see if it truly agrees with Christian doctrine:

 

¹⁶ And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

¹⁷ But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

¹⁸ And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

 

²¹ And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

²² And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

 

²⁵ And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

 

¹ Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

² And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

³ But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

⁴ And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

⁵ For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

⁶ And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

⁷ And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

⁸ And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

⁹ And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

Genesis chapters 2 and 3.

 

God told Adam that he was allowed to eat from all the trees in the Garden except for the tree of knowledge.  God then declares that on the day Adam ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, he would surely die.

 

As it turns out, this was a lie.

 

And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.  Genesis 5:5

 

So it is clear that Adam did not die in the day that he ate of the fruit; rather he lived nearly a thousand years.  “But a day is like a thousand years with god!” one might say.  While it is true that St. Paul made such a pronouncement, it does not square off with the text of Genesis, which makes plain what a day was:

 

And the evening and the morning were the first day.  Genesis 1:5

 

Thus it is clear that God lied to Adam.  God made it clear that an evening and a morning constituted a day; then claimed that Adam would die the same day he ate the fruit.  But the text is lucid concerning how long Adam lived.

 

Next, God created a woman for Adam and the woman started talking to a serpent.  The serpent asked the woman about the fruit of the tree of knowledge and she responded that they were not to eat it, nor even touch it, on pain of death.  The serpent then explained to Eve that she had the opportunity of a lifetime in front of her.  She had the chance to know the difference between good and evil.

 

The implication here is staggering.  God had demanded that Adam and Eve choose between good and evil without even understanding the difference.  Moreover, he had placed the fate of their lives upon them making the right choice, because, so far as Adam and Eve knew, they would die if they ate the fruit.  God had clearly withheld vital information from those he expected to choose good over evil.

 

So, Eve made the choice to eat of the fruit.  She, then, took some to Adam, who also ate of it.  In the cool of the day, God came to find them hiding in shame because of what they had done.  God was very angry and pronounced curses on all parties involved, including pain in childbirth, toilsome labor, and ultimately, death.

 

What is completely missing from the story is the idea of Original Sin, upon which the concept of eternal conscious torment is built.  This is important and should be questioned thoroughly.

 

If, in fact, eating the fruit would introduce Original Sin into the world, why would God not have mentioned it?  Why would God not have explained to Adam and Eve that the fates of their children hung on them not eating the fruit, given that to make the wrong choice would cause all of their descendents to be born into sin?  How could God expect Adam and Eve to make an informed decision when he was withholding so many of the details?

 

Why would God’s only warning concern death (and even that was a lie)?

 

Moreover, if the fate of all those who would, in future, choose not to follow God, be everlasting torture in hell, then why would God not have provided that information as a stern warning?  Surely, God, who is omniscient, knew that bringing Original Sin into the world would condemn the majority of his “children” to an eternity of torment and suffering.  He allegedly had already created hell for the devil and his fallen angels.  This information would have prevented untold millions from being cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.  Why would He not provide it to those making the choice?

 

It is clear that God expected Adam and Eve to make the most critical choice in all of human history.  The fate of all humanity rested upon the decision they would make.  The entire population of earth, since the dawn of creation, stood to face eternal damnation or everlasting bliss depending upon which choice this ill-advised couple would make.

 

Yet, rather than provide all of the facts, all of the warnings, and all of the details needed to make a thoroughly informed and educated choice, God blatantly lied, withheld vital information, and set His creation up for ultimate failure.

 

Then He blamed the victims; and cursed them.

 

Which brings the final question:  Is the Christian doctrine false, or is God simply the biggest liar there ever was?

 

 

 

All texts taken from http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/

A lot to discuss at one time Prof, but if your up for it, I enjoy this discussion. Don't really think I should be here anymore, but that's my deal.

 

If you would like to discuss, then here's my opening comment.......don't know that it matters, but "IN that day thou shall surely die". Would have to rely on the word "in" and that one day is longer that our 24 hour day.....Regardless, there are some neat types in here to consider.

 

The text clearly demonstrates that there was morning and evening and that constituted a day.  The laws of physics would have to be completely rewritten for any day, historical or modern, to be longer than 24 hours, as that is how long it takes the earth to go through a full revolution on its axis.

 

That said, define "in".

[Fernweh]

We would still be Christians if only we understood the true meaning of two letter prepositions.

[Kris]

Why is everything so goddamned cryptic with god? All these mystical interpretations of vague prophecies, telling his people one thing but meaning another, lying, etc..,. I am sick hearing that: well it says a day, but it wasn't a day like we know, it was different. I cry bullshit. What kind of god does this kind of crap? How about some "plain truth"?

 

Just looking at this story again shows how diabolical god really is---- poor Adam and Eve didn't have a chance. This also relates to something else if a similar nature that I was thinking of the other day--- god sent Jesus supposedly as the messiah-- yet he was exactly opposite of how the messiah was described by the OT--- and in fact, matched up to false prophets. The Jews were even told that no man can be god. Yet supposedly, that is how Jesus came--and the Jews didn't recognize him. God is a jerk!! The Jews didn't have a fucking chance either. Or. All of this is a giant load of crap.

[Guest end3]

Didn't really want to go down this path Prof, but if you insist. Define how long it would take to set the sun and the earth to "let there be light" and "separate the waters", etc. per physics today. So how would you like to define this discussion....with an open mind or acknowledging things we can't define nor prove.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Didn't really want to go down this path Prof, but if you insist. Define how long it would take to set the sun and the earth to "let there be light" and "separate the waters", etc. per physics today. So how would you like to define this discussion....with an open mind or acknowledging things we can't define nor prove.

Concerning the sun and earth and waters it would take billions of years, I would think.  BAA or Bhim would be more qualified to answer.

 

As far as defining this discussion, I'm leery of even having it in the first place, given the enormity of things we can't define or prove.

[Guest SteveBennett]

To the OP,

 

1)  You have morals i.e. You know right from wrong.

2)  Sometimes you do what is wrong.  And sometimes, you refuse to do what is right.

 

In other words,

3)  You are guilty of breaking this moral law for which you are directly, and immediately, aware.

4)  Were you to stand before a Supreme Judge with a perfect record of every infraction you've ever committed-- you would be found guilty of multiple infractions-- and then sentenced according to the weight and severity of your infractions.

Now. . . we certainly don't need Christianity, whatsoever, to explain any of this to us to know that it is obviously true. But the key issue that your original post is fundamentally pursuant of the question, "what is the gospel? What is this thing that Christian's call the 'good news.'"

5)  God makes you (all of us actually) an offer as an "intercessor."  "Intercessor" is a legal term.  There are many examples of intercession in both modern as well as ancient court's of law.  Such as:

  -- Father paying the court money to pay for a son's infractions.
  -- President granting a defendant immunity for his infractions.
  -- Innocent friend taking the blame for a guilty friend's infractions.
  -- Mayor pardoning a defendant for his infractions.
  -- Victim dropping charges for a defendant's infractions.
  -- Plaintiff relinquishing a claim on a defendant's debt.

So "intercession" simply means to interrupt the normal due process which would have ultimately resulted in the sentencing of a guilty party.

And this is the "gospel," (the good news).  That while we were yet sinners. . . God, in the person of Jesus Christ, interceded on our behelf.

Now. . . the defendant of a case [You] does not have to accept any offer of intercession-- let alone understand the legalize behind it-- and can, instead, choose to plea a case which results in a path of normal due process and sentencing according to what you have done.

But why, on earth, would you do that?  *Especially* given fact set 1-4?

[Guest end3]

 

Didn't really want to go down this path Prof, but if you insist. Define how long it would take to set the sun and the earth to "let there be light" and "separate the waters", etc. per physics today. So how would you like to define this discussion....with an open mind or acknowledging things we can't define nor prove.

Concerning the sun and earth and waters it would take billions of years, I would think.  BAA or Bhim would be more qualified to answer.

 

As far as defining this discussion, I'm leery of even having it in the first place, given the enormity of things we can't define or prove.

 

Then I don't know why you are concerned with marrying the two, the Christian account vs. science.

 

'bout the only thing I can think of to add is we know our language changes routinely and can only think what differences now vs. thousands of years ago...

[TheRedneckProfessor]

To the OP,

 

1)  You have morals i.e. You know right from wrong.

 

2)  Sometimes you do what is wrong.  And sometimes, you refuse to do what is right.

 

In other words,

3)  You are guilty of breaking this moral law for which you are directly, and immediately, aware.

 

4)  Were you to stand before a Supreme Judge with a perfect record of every infraction you've ever committed-- you would be found guilty of multiple infractions-- and then sentenced according to the weight and severity of your infractions.

 

Now. . . we certainly don't need Christianity, whatsoever, to explain any of this to us to know that it is obviously true. But the key issue that your original post is fundamentally pursuant of the question, "what is the gospel? What is this thing that Christian's call the 'good news.'"

5)  God makes you (all of us actually) an offer as an "intercessor."  "Intercessor" is a legal term.  There are many examples of intercession in both modern as well as ancient court's of law.  Such as:

 

  -- Father paying the court money to pay for a son's infractions.

  -- President granting a defendant immunity for his infractions.

  -- Innocent friend taking the blame for a guilty friend's infractions.

  -- Mayor pardoning a defendant for his infractions.

  -- Victim dropping charges for a defendant's infractions.

  -- Plaintiff relinquishing a claim on a defendant's debt.

 

So "intercession" simply means to interrupt the normal due process which would have ultimately resulted in the sentencing of a guilty party.

 

And this is the "gospel," (the good news).  That while we were yet sinners. . . God, in the person of Jesus Christ, interceded on our behelf.

 

Now. . . the defendant of a case [You] does not have to accept any offer of intercession-- let alone understand the legalize behind it-- and can, instead, choose to plea a case which results in a path of normal due process and sentencing according to what you have done.

 

But why, on earth, would you do that?  *Especially* given fact set 1-4?

You have completely missed the point.  Had god not been so deceitful, he would not have needed to offer himself to me as an intercessor.  

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

Didn't really want to go down this path Prof, but if you insist. Define how long it would take to set the sun and the earth to "let there be light" and "separate the waters", etc. per physics today. So how would you like to define this discussion....with an open mind or acknowledging things we can't define nor prove.

Concerning the sun and earth and waters it would take billions of years, I would think.  BAA or Bhim would be more qualified to answer.

 

As far as defining this discussion, I'm leery of even having it in the first place, given the enormity of things we can't define or prove.

 

Then I don't know why you are concerned with marrying the two, the Christian account vs. science.

 

'bout the only thing I can think of to add is we know our language changes routinely and can only think what differences now vs. thousands of years ago...

 

I'm not trying to marry the two.  I'm simply saying that the text calls a morning and an evening a day, which coincides with what we know of as a day.  The earth rotates in roughly a 24 hour period, which gives us a morning and an evening.