Newborn responds to me...I think...:
quote:
God had give them a law first.
So? How were they supposed to know this? They hadn't eaten from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil yet and thus were incapable of understanding what a "law" was and why it would be important to follow it.
And if someone else comes along and tells you that the person who gave you this "law," whatever that is, is lying, what do you do? How do you decide between them? What criteria do you use? It can't be because "god is good" becuase you don't know what "good" is.
quote:
Then they had responsability to obey God not the serpent.
Why? How on earth could they possibly know this? They hadn't eaten from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and thus had no concept of things like duty and responsibility.
I do not deny that the events of the story and the intent of god's statement to Adam and Eve. I am simply asking how on earth anybody could reasonably think that Adam and Eve would understand what was being asked of them given the precise fact that they were innocent having not eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and thus ignorant of things like good and evil.
Doesn't sin require deliberate action? How can one deliberately do evil if one doesn't know what evil is?
Again, suppose you have a delicate Mhing vase that you don't want broken. Do you leave it on a wobbly pedestal next to a toddler? Even if you tell the toddler not to touch it? Do you really expect the toddler to understand? And when you find the vase in pieces, do you blame the toddler for doing what toddlers do or do you blame yourself for being stupid enough to think the toddler would keep away?
quote:
It is unfair for a supreme being to post a law after a less powerful entity(Satan in this case).
Excuse me? This sentence no verb.
By the way...the serpent wasn't the devil. You will notice that god curses the serpent. If the serpent were the devil, then this would be the story of the fall of Lucifer and it isn't.
quote:
Without a law first and a temptation next sin could not exist.
No, temptation existed the moment god put the Tree of Knowledge in the garden next to two innocents who wouldn't know any better not to eat from the tree, even if told not to.
How could they possibly understand the commandment not to eat from the tree? They hadn't eaten from the tree yet, so they didn't understand good and evil and thus couldn't understand things like duty and obligation and responsibility. They don't know what "good" is and thus don't understand that following god's commandments is a "good" thing and not following them is an "evil" thing.
So if someone comes along and tells you that the other guy telling you not to do something is lying to you, how do you decide who is really lying? One of them is, but you have no capabilities of finding out.
Suppose somebody tells you to do something because it is beetaratagang. Somebody else then comes along and tells you not to do it because it is clerendipity.
Which do you choose? One of those will let you go to heaven while the other will damn you to hell. So which do you choose? Why do you hesitate? You're an intelligent person with free will, capable of making a choice. Come on! Which is it?
Do you understand the point I am trying to make? You have no idea what beetaratagang and clerendipity mean. And yet, here I am trying to get you to choose between them. How on earth can you possibly make a choice between things you don't understand and be expected to understand your choice and take responsibility for that choice?
quote:
It dont makes sense to have a temptation before a law.
Then why did god tempt Adam and Eve with the Tree of Knowledge?
quote:
That is because the more powerful one can not be unfair.
Why not? God was certainly unfair when it came to Adam and Eve. He made them innocent and thus incapable of comprehending his commandments, tempted them, and then punished them for doing exactly what would be expected from people who don't understand the consequences of their actions.
So where does this idea come from that god can't be unfair just because he is more powerful?
quote:
Oh,and Adam and Eve died but it was a spiritual death meaning they were doomed with the entire creation and loose their relationship with God .
That isn't what god says:
Genesis 2:17: 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.
Notice it is not a statement of spiritual death. It is a statement of physical death.
It even gets repeated:
Genesis 3:3: 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.
Again, not a spiritual death but a physical death.
And look at what the serpent says:
Genesis 3:4: And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
3:5: 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.
And sure enough, that's exactly what happens:
Genesis 3:22: 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:
So it seems that the serpent was telling the truth and god was lying. Eating of the tree would not cause...not even a spiritual death. Instead, it would make one as the gods. Indeed, one only need to eat from the Tree of Life and the transformation would be complete.
It seems god is scared of his creation, worried that his creation might rise up and supplant him.
------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!
™ Version 4.2