Sin Before The Fall...major Problem With Blaming Sin On Man......

[Asimov]

I guess I'm not explaining this very well....let me try again

 

If we are perfect yet still have the ability to choose we will always choose the correct option, which would be to obey God.

 

but satan was an angel and chose to disobey, where does that leave xian theology?

 

Incoherent.

[Guest Shiva H. Vishnu]

If being perfect means that you can never make a wrong choice then perfection precludes freewill. Any time you have only one option, whatever factor may be limiting your options, you can hardly be said to have free will.

[Kuroikaze]

Incoherent.

 

how is that incoherent? if satan was an angel he was perfect right? if so how was he able to sin?

[Asimov]

If being perfect means that you can never make a wrong choice then perfection precludes freewill. Any time you have only one option, whatever factor may be limiting your options, you can hardly be said to have free will.

 

Perfection isn't a limitation.

 

Let's say that I'm a good person and I'm given the option of either stealing a candy bar or paying for it.

 

Obviously since I know that stealing a candy bar is wrong and I'm a good person (but not perfect) I'm not gonna steal it. The option of stealing it was there, but I didn't because I was a good person. That's not a limitation, it's a virtue.

 

The same thing with perfection. Someone who is perfect would know that stealing the candy bar is wrong and would know that God would be aware of their stealing, so the perfect choice would be to pay for the candy bar and not steal it.

 

how is that incoherent? if satan was an angel he was perfect right? if so how was he able to sin?

 

You just answered your own question.

 

If satan was perfect, he would never choose to sin...therefore it's incoherent to say that satan would sin.

 

Therefore, the theology is incoherent.

[Who?]

 

I don't view the fall as a punishment. It is an opportunity!

 

 

 

thats funny cause God calls it a punisment....besides opportunity to what? Be sent to hell for eternity? I guess I should just fall to my knees right now and thank god for giving me the opportunity to be punished eternaly because I can't bring myself to worship the sadisctic son of a bitch

Opportunity to make ourselves what we want. To choose what we will be and work to obtain that.

 

Hell is the place prepared for those who choose to follow other than god, correct. Is that so hard to believe though? Do you think that gods laws given here on earth will not have a place in his kingdom? If not why would he give them to us? Do you think that those who have followed other laws will, at that time of return, be ready to suddenly obey the laws given by god? We are who we choose to be. This mortal life gives us the opportunity to avoid that hell, and live in such a way that we will be prepared to live in heaven.

 

I don't view the fall as a punishment. It is an opportunity!

 

That's a mighty optimistic outlook.

 

Though it still doesn't excuse things. Great, an opportunity to get back to exactly where we were. All this just for God's amusement? That's basically what's happening if we go along with the Adam & Eve story. God could have given us exactly what we needed in the first place, but chose not to, instead he decided to play around with us. Whatever reason he decided to do it, it's still mean. Because he's penalizing us for his mistake. Or you could say we're being given the opportunity to play God's game which he put us at a disadvantage to play from the get go.

 

Only in our returning we will return with all the experience, knowledge and attributes we have sought to gain in this mortal life. If we have used our agency wisely then, we will return mor like him who sent us, able to recieve the greater things he has prepared for us. Mortality is a boon. The unfortunate part is that people will waste it on the pursuit of things which will not last beyond it, or in pursuit of the attributes which will only serve to bind the soul, rather than free it.

 

 

 

Combine this with proper understanding of the redemption made by the Christ and we can begin to understand our purpose on this earth. Even if we do not always understand the minor details.

 

 

yes...the genocide of entire nations is clearly a MINOR detail....what could I have been thinking

 

 

You may hate me for saying so, but it is. Death is a necessary part of life. If you remember the story of Adam, cherubims were placed to stop him from partaking of the tree of life. Immortality in this mortal state is not a desirable thing. This time to repent and obtain attributes worthy of the presence of god, does come to an end. It is inescapable.

[Eponymic]

Hell is the place prepared for those who choose to follow other than god, correct. Is that so hard to believe though? Do you think that gods laws given here on earth will not have a place in his kingdom? If not why would he give them to us? Do you think that those who have followed other laws will, at that time of return, be ready to suddenly obey the laws given by god? We are who we choose to be. This mortal life gives us the opportunity to avoid that hell, and live in such a way that we will be prepared to live in heaven.

 

This still isn't dealing with the issue that God forced us into this position. It's not an opportunity to redeem ourselves in his eyes when he's the one who forced us into this spot in the first place!

 

And that's all I'm going to say about that because I don't believe in Adam, Eve, or Archimedes in any way shape or form other than mythology.

 

Only in our returning we will return with all the experience, knowledge and attributes we have sought to gain in this mortal life. If we have used our agency wisely then, we will return mor like him who sent us, able to recieve the greater things he has prepared for us. Mortality is a boon. The unfortunate part is that people will waste it on the pursuit of things which will not last beyond it, or in pursuit of the attributes which will only serve to bind the soul, rather than free it.

 

This is merely dancing around my question & point. Feel free to play fancy feet all you want, when you really want to discuss this issue- I'll be glad to.

 

 

You may hate me for saying so, but it is. Death is a necessary part of life. If you remember the story of Adam, cherubims were placed to stop him from partaking of the tree of life. Immortality in this mortal state is not a desirable thing. This time to repent and obtain attributes worthy of the presence of god, does come to an end. It is inescapable.

 

Death is a necessity, murdering millions of people, is not. In fact, it's your God disobeying his own laws. So there were cherubims, so what. Are they now responsible for not being on guard and protecting Adam & Eve? Heck, even more reason that it's ludicrous that you're blaming Adam & Eve when the guards that were supposed to be helping out weren't doing their job. Ya never here about the cherubs getting punished.

[Jedah]

WHat I have always wondered was how the serphant got into the garden in the first place when he was supposedly banished.... ? Or was it snakes that made evil ? Or did god let him in to see if an ignorant being would believe a serphant ? So God needed to test his own creation ? So much for pretty much all of the morals christians claim to have.

[NotBlinded]

Hell is the place prepared for those who choose to follow other than god, correct. Is that so hard to believe though? Do you think that gods laws given here on earth will not have a place in his kingdom? If not why would he give them to us? Do you think that those who have followed other laws will, at that time of return, be ready to suddenly obey the laws given by god? We are who we choose to be. This mortal life gives us the opportunity to avoid that hell, and live in such a way that we will be prepared to live in heaven.

 

This still isn't dealing with the issue that God forced us into this position. It's not an opportunity to redeem ourselves in his eyes when he's the one who forced us into this spot in the first place!

 

And that's all I'm going to say about that because I don't believe in Adam, Eve, or Archimedes in any way shape or form other than mythology.

 

>snip<

 

You may hate me for saying so, but it is. Death is a necessary part of life. If you remember the story of Adam, cherubims were placed to stop him from partaking of the tree of life. Immortality in this mortal state is not a desirable thing. This time to repent and obtain attributes worthy of the presence of god, does come to an end. It is inescapable.

 

Death is a necessity, murdering millions of people, is not. In fact, it's your God disobeying his own laws. So there were cherubims, so what. Are they now responsible for not being on guard and protecting Adam & Eve? Heck, even more reason that it's ludicrous that you're blaming Adam & Eve when the guards that were supposed to be helping out weren't doing their job. Ya never here about the cherubs getting punished.

Hi Eponymic.

 

First I wanted to address Who (although s/he ignores me ).

 

Who...as far as I know, there is not anywhere in the bible that Jesus addresses life after physical death (hell or heaven). If there is, can you show me where?

 

Eponymic,

 

Who forgets this passage about being 'awake' from Mark:

 

13:34

For the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch.

13:35

Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning:

13:36

Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping.

13:37

And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

 

This is saying the same thing that monks know about all too dearly. A monk would be meditating and the Master would come around and smack them with a stick. If they were 'asleep' (lost in thought) the stick would make contact. If they were 'awake' (no thoughts), they would know the Master was coming and stop him from hitting them.

 

So, is Who saying the cherubims were 'asleep' or is he saying that Adam and Eve were 'asleep'? I tend to think it was the latter, from an allegorical standpoint.

 

WHat I have always wondered was how the serphant got into the garden in the first place when he was supposedly banished.... ? Or was it snakes that made evil ? Or did god let him in to see if an ignorant being would believe a serphant ? So God needed to test his own creation ? So much for pretty much all of the morals christians claim to have.

Literally, it makes no sense at all in my opinion also. I like to look at it as an internal battle between lies vs the truth. Knowledge is infested with lies...another way to say it, allegorically, is to say the tree of knowledge was infested with snakes (prince of lies or satan).

[pandora]

 

I don't view the fall as a punishment. It is an opportunity!

 

 

 

thats funny cause God calls it a punisment....besides opportunity to what? Be sent to hell for eternity? I guess I should just fall to my knees right now and thank god for giving me the opportunity to be punished eternaly because I can't bring myself to worship the sadisctic son of a bitch

 

 

So you're saying that God allowed sin to happen because we would not be able to know and enjoy and love goodness without the experience of sin and suffering?

 

 

By the way, I have never heard the cherubin story... where does that come from?

[Taphophilia]

An interesting tidbit that I found. Mythra's post on Ugarit got me interested in researching Canaanite dieties.

 

There are 139 references to Canaanite gods in the OT.

 

El and Ashtoroth were the mother and father Canaanite gods. They had seventy sons, Yahweh being one of them. Shachar was the God of the dawn, Yahweh's brother, which is the word used to describe morning in Ezekial 14:12 "Lucifer son of the morning".

 

So, knowing this, Lucifer/Satan actually is Yahweh's nephew according to Canaanite dieties which were adopted and adapted by the Semites who assimilated the culture.

It makes sense that Yahweh's nephew wanted to overthrow his uncle. What Shakespere play is that?

Also, it would stand to reason that Yahwah's nephew was welcomed in his court when we have Satan going before Yahweh in the OT.

 

There is also speculation that many of the Hebrew patriarchs such as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Daniel were also originally sons Canaanite gods, who were later humanized to in order to assure the supremacy of Yahweh.

 

Taph

[Eponymic]

So you're saying that God allowed sin to happen because we would not be able to know and enjoy and love goodness without the experience of sin and suffering?

 

Any way you cut it, this God is being a colossal prick.

 

He put Adam & Eve there & set them up to fail.

 

Was it really necessary for him to make us go through all this bull when he could have created us with all the tools to start out with?

 

Think about it, this is our supposed creator. And as the creator he has the ability to create us any way he wants, as perfect as he wants. To create us with flaws, and then to punish us for it is nothing more than a heartless, viscious, preventable action. If the God of the Bible exists, he's one cold hearted jerk who isn't owning up for his responsibility.

[Who?]

Alright, I guess you do not remember the tree of life.

 

The tree of life was different from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. If Adam had partaken of it after partaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he would have been immortally mortal. Not a good thing, so guards were placed to prevent Adam from doing such. Sorry about that.

 

As for your trying to blame god for making Adam partake of the fruit, I thought we had already discussed this. Adam had his agency he was free to choose, then you ask why would god do this, I gave you an answer and then you accuse me of dancing around your point?

 

So you're saying that God allowed sin to happen because we would not be able to know and enjoy and love goodness without the experience of sin and suffering?

 

 

Ya I guess it is.

 

And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.

And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.

But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things.

Adam fell that men might be; and men care, that they might have joy.

[Eponymic]

As for your trying to blame god for making Adam partake of the fruit, I thought we had already discussed this. Adam had his agency he was free to choose, then you ask why would god do this, I gave you an answer and then you accuse me of dancing around your point?

 

Yes, because the point is that Adam's freedom of choice is secondary to the fact that God created him with built in disadvantages.

 

Saying Adam has choice doesn't proclude the fact that: Bible God set Adam up without proper knowledge of what he was dealing with (good/evil), and punished him for it. Bible God, being supposedly all-knowing & all-powerful, could have easily given Adam better faculties to make an educated choice; Bible God can't even appoint quality guardians; Bible God made it impossible for Adam and Eve to avoid sinning no matter what. Because in order to procreate Adam & Eve had to have sex with each other, henceforth, the sin of incest.

 

You can't blame the creation for the fact that the creator made him with difficiencies. There's no way to take responsibility away from a supposed all-knowing God. If God truly is all-knowing then he knew that Adam would sin when he created him the way he did.

[All Gods Fail]

Alright, I guess you do not remember the tree of life.

 

The tree of life was different from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. If Adam had partaken of it after partaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he would have been immortally mortal. Not a good thing, so guards were placed to prevent Adam from doing such. Sorry about that.

 

...imortally mortal?

 

So you're saying that God allowed sin to happen because we would not be able to know and enjoy and love goodness without the experience of sin and suffering?

 

Ya I guess it is.

 

I beg pardon?

 

And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.

And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.

But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things.

Adam fell that men might be; and men care, that they might have joy.

 

Wow...that is just about the stupidest thing I've ever read here, and that's saying something.

 

The whole point of Eden (as far as xtianity is concerned) was that it was paradise, but we lost it through sin. Apparently, life in a sinless paradise with god was actually a bad thing, so it was good that A&E ate the forbidden fruit and spiced up all our lives.

 

Did it ever occur to you that Genesis might just be a fable, not meant to be taken literally? That it might just be an ancient folktale, like Pandora's box?

[Anakin]

As for your trying to blame god for making Adam partake of the fruit, I thought we had already discussed this. Adam had his agency he was free to choose, then you ask why would god do this, I gave you an answer and then you accuse me of dancing around your point?

Dude, is this common or what? Do all fundie types that come here claim free will at some

time or another? There is no free will according to the holy babble.

[Kuroikaze]

If Adam had partaken of it after partaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he would have been immortally mortal.

 

Ok....I'm sorry but i have to call bull shit on this statement

 

 

when oh when will fundys learn that rewriting the meanings of words does not equal logic.

 

Listen, words have meanings ok? Immortal and Mortal are antonyms, they mean opposite things. Putting them together does not suddenly get rid of the contradiction.

 

saying things like this just makes you look like an idiot, the point of lauguage is to COMMUNICATE, all sentences like this do is obfuscate meaning, which is a guess the whole point of apologetics in the first place.

 

 

please stop engaging in curcumlocution and say something inteligible.

[Who?]

If Adam had partaken of it after partaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he would have been immortally mortal.

 

Ok....I'm sorry but i have to call bull shit on this statement

 

 

when oh when will fundys learn that rewriting the meanings of words does not equal logic.

 

Listen, words have meanings ok? Immortal and Mortal are antonyms, they mean opposite things. Putting them together does not suddenly get rid of the contradiction.

 

saying things like this just makes you look like an idiot, the point of lauguage is to COMMUNICATE, all sentences like this do is obfuscate meaning, which is a guess the whole point of apologetics in the first place.

 

 

please stop engaging in curcumlocution and say something inteligible.

 

A part of language allows for synonyms aswell, with a thesaurus handy we can exchange crude language for proper language. When we do this we are better recieved by most if not all.

 

Furthermore a part of language isn't getting so got up in the individual meaning of words that we lose the message of the combined portion, context is a vital part of communication. Immortal in the sense that he would not die. Mortal in the sense of living in the mortal state, cut off from the presences of the Lord.

 

Now behold, my son, I will explain this thing unto thee. For behold, after the Lord God sent our first parents forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground, from whence they were taken—yea, he drew out the man, and he placed at the east end of the garden of Eden, cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the tree of life—

Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil; and lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever, the Lord God placed acherubim and the flaming sword, that he should not partake of the fruit—

And thus we see, that there was a time granted unto man to repent, yea, a probationary time, a time to repent and serve God.

For behold, if Adam had put forth his hand immediately, and partaken of the tree of life, he would have lived forever, according to the word of God, having no space for repentance; yea, and also the word of God would have been void, and the great plan of salvation would have been frustrated.

But behold, it was appointed unto man to die—therefore, as they were cut off from the tree of life they should be cut off from the face of the earth—and man became lost forever, yea, they became fallen man.

And now, ye see by this that our first parents were cut off both temporally and spiritually from the presence of the Lord; and thus we see they became subjects to follow after their own will.

 

 

funies claim free will

 

Because agency (which is a little different but same concept) is a necessary part of achieving our potential.

 

Stupidest thing I've ever heard

 

Its not up to me to come to your conclusions for you. I may be on the wrong boat with a bunch of delusional freaks, c'est la vie.

 

 

 

Sorry Eponymic. This thread started at point B, and I kinda assumed point A was already covered. However given how well you have recieved my understanding of point B, I can only imagine how you would recieve A.

[Eponymic]

 

A part of language allows for synonyms aswell, with a thesaurus handy we can exchange crude language for proper language. When we do this we are better recieved by most if not all.

 

Furthermore a part of language isn't getting so got up in the individual meaning of words that we lose the message of the combined portion, context is a vital part of communication. Immortal in the sense that he would not die. Mortal in the sense of living in the mortal state, cut off from the presences of the Lord.

 

Furthermore a part of language isn't getting so got up in the individual meaning...

 

Furthermore, you will be much greatr respected and lisund too if you get yur spelling correctt.

 

Fun aside, your saying immortally living as a mortal is bad is pure conjecture. Who's to say that many people wouldn't enjoy living like that? It's pure opinion to presuppose that Adam or anyone other than your self or people you talk to about it wouldn't like living like this.

 

And now, ye see by this that our first parents were cut off both temporally and spiritually from the presence of the Lord; and thus we see they became subjects to follow after their own will.

 

And thus, the all-knowing Lord who created them knowing the would do this, damned them himself by creating man in this way.

 

Sorry Eponymic. This thread started at point B, and I kinda assumed point A was already covered. However given how well you have recieved my understanding of point B, I can only imagine how you would recieve A.

 

Okay...

To me, point B is irrelevant if you can't reconcile the immediate causation (Point A for me) of how God (the creator) has no responsibility or isn't the cause of man's fall. Free will is after the point.

 

And it's condescending to me for you to say that I haven't received your understanding. I understand your reasoning, that doesn't mean I accept it. But I most certainly understand it.

[Kuroikaze]

If Adam had partaken of it after partaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he would have been immortally mortal.

 

Ok....I'm sorry but i have to call bull shit on this statement

 

 

when oh when will fundys learn that rewriting the meanings of words does not equal logic.

 

Listen, words have meanings ok? Immortal and Mortal are antonyms, they mean opposite things. Putting them together does not suddenly get rid of the contradiction.

 

saying things like this just makes you look like an idiot, the point of lauguage is to COMMUNICATE, all sentences like this do is obfuscate meaning, which is a guess the whole point of apologetics in the first place.

 

 

please stop engaging in curcumlocution and say something inteligible.

 

A part of language allows for synonyms aswell, with a thesaurus handy we can exchange crude language for proper language. When we do this we are better recieved by most if not all.

 

Furthermore a part of language isn't getting so got up in the individual meaning of words that we lose the message of the combined portion, context is a vital part of communication. Immortal in the sense that he would not die. Mortal in the sense of living in the mortal state, cut off from the presences of the Lord.

 

 

Ok the first part is nothing more than a snide attack of my use of four letter words, at least my disdane for you is out in the open unlike your disdane for me which you try to cover up with your "proper language" I called it bull shit because it was, period. Anyway I don't remember every saying I WANTED to be well recieved by you so in honor of your first paragraph, I don't give a shit

 

don't like cus words? then go to a church, I'm sure you can find a ton of people there who don't cus, of course they will talk about people behind their back and disguise gosip as prayer requests....but they don't cus so its ok I guess

 

as for your second paragraph just continues to show both your ignorance and your double speak....question, Are you a politician? because you'd make a great one

 

the combined meaning of immortally mortal is nonsence....even one of my friends who is a christan agrees that what you said has no meanining or bearing on the discussion. also Mortal doesn't mean "cut off from the presence of the lord" ok ok maybe it has that meaning for you, but its not a meaning that I have ever used, either before or since leaving the christain faith. Again, the purpose of writing is to COMMUNICATE, if you use words in ways that people don't understand then you have accomplished nothing except to confuse others, which is of course why applogists speak the way they do.

 

Logic and rational thought are a death blow to fundamentalist thinking and has to be burried under a mound of retoric and nonsense words

 

You might ask yourself why the only way you can explain your faith is by making up new definitions for words.

 

(oh and by the way, just so you know my disdane does not extend to all christians, just the ones that act like stupidity makes sense, and then act like thier belief makes them better than me)

[All Gods Fail]

Stupidest thing I've ever heard

 

Its not up to me to come to your conclusions for you. I may be on the wrong boat with a bunch of delusional freaks, c'est la vie.

 

I take it back - that was the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

 

And besides, you're the one that has invisible friends so I would watch who you call delusional.