|
Author
|
Topic: Why Creationism
|
Charles Munroe
Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 40 From: Simi Valley, CA USA Joined: 09-07-2003
|
|
Message 1 of 91 (54507)
09-09-2003 2:08 AM
|
|
|
Posted a message recently and got a garbled response to the question asked. Why do we need Creationism, or for that matter Genesis? The New Testament functions quite nicely without the Old Testament and avoids all the controversial materiel. Example : God created everything and that must include the devil. God wanders off leaving his creations in the company of a being God knows is evil, leaves a deadly fruit tree where naive Adam and Eve can eat thereof and when these two innocents are duped into eating the fruit what odes God do? Throws them out of paradise. What does God do to the evil one? Commands him to crawl on his belly which, if I recall, is what the serpents did prior to the so called punishment.
Q. Why, if God loved his creation, could he act so carelessly?
A. Why he was testing humankind.
R. Really. I only count two that were tested. The rest of us weren't born yet and I don't see the logic of my suffering for the mistakes of people long before I came on board.
A. Well, it was passed down genetically.
Q. Well, if so then why didn't God sterilize one or both to stop the spread of evil?
A. Oh, God couldn't do such a terrible thing.
Q. But he could drown most all life on earth in the flood of Noah? Maybe fundamentalist should consider circular filing the Old Testament and concentrate on the words of Jesus Christ. Jesus said "all have sinned" and I think it is a very poor showing of faith when one has to resort to the Old Testament to confirm what Jesus said.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 2 by judge, posted 09-09-2003 2:12 AM | | Charles Munroe has not replied | | | Message 3 by Eximius, posted 09-09-2003 4:35 AM | | Charles Munroe has not replied | | | Message 5 by Rei, posted 09-10-2003 6:20 PM | | Charles Munroe has not replied | | | Message 6 by Zealot, posted 11-16-2003 3:40 PM | | Charles Munroe has replied | | | Message 73 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-19-2003 10:37 AM | | Charles Munroe has not replied |
|
judge
Member (Idle past 6469 days) Posts: 216 From: australia Joined: 11-11-2002
|
Yeah...life is pretty bad. On the other hand though, life is pretty good.
|
Eximius
Inactive Member
|
Charles Munroe writes: Why do we need Creationism, or for that matter Genesis? The New Testament functions quite nicely without the Old Testament and avoids all the controversial materiel. The following is taken from "God" by Alexander Waugh:
Christians give two reasons for holding on to the Old Testament. The first is that these books predict and promise things about Jesus Christ. Biblical scholars and many Christians now agree that this is not accurate, that the New Testament gospels were written to make it look as though Jesus' coming had been foretold by the older scriptures. For instance when Jesus ordered his disciples to fetch a colt for his ride into Jerusalem (Luke 19:30) this was supposed to fulfil the prophecy of Zechariah (9:9), 'Behold thy king cometh unto thee having salvation, lowly riding upon an ass and upon the colt of a foal of an ass.' With many such examples it is held that the Evangelists invented the stories in order for it to look like a case of divine prophecy. The gospel writers of the second century certainly knew their scriptures; Matthew pointed to twenty examples of scriptural fulfilment, Luke to twenty-five. In order to persuade Jews to join the new cult of Christianity, they had to show that the Messiah, who was promised by the Hebrew Bible, had indeed materialised in the form of Jesus 'Christ'. There can be little doubt as to what end the gopels were written or which way around the New Testament prophecies occurred. But for those Christians who fervently believe in the Old Testament prophecies, an important questions remains: Is it still worth holding on to the Old Testament (for the sake of the prophecies) when keeping it means continuing with the brutal, embarrassing Old Testament God of Israel? But there is another reason why Christians need to retain the Old Testament which has nothing to do with prophecy. Christianity teaches that Christ was the saviour, he came down to the world to show people how they might be saved from the stigma of original sin. Because of Adam's behaviour God is displeased with the lot of us. By adhering to the doctrines of Jesus, it is believed that God will overlook the inherited disgrace of a chosen few, granting them happiness at a future date. Because of this Christianity needs the story of Adam and Eve and the doctrine of original sin more that Judaism or Islam do; for if Adam had not taken the apple, or worse still if Adam had never existed, Jesus' whole raison d'tre would disappear in a puff of smoke. If mankind had not been tainted by Adam's petty misdemeanour, none of us would need to be saved, and would hence see no poiint in a saviour. This simple fact chains the Christian to the whole Bible not just his beloved New Testament, and the God of Israel has to come along for the ride. A few pages later it says:
Marcion's contention was that the God of Israel, as represented by the Old Testament was a wholly imperfect being, yet the Christian schema required God to be perfect. From this, Marcion deduced that the God who created Adam and Eve, the one who threw hailstones at the Israelited in the time of Moses, could not be the same God as the one represented by Jesus. To get around the problem of Adam and Eve Marcion suggested that the real reason mankind needs Jesus the saviour has nothing to do with original sin, but is due to the fact that the Creator God, who made heaven and earth, was himself imperfect. Jesus' function, according to Marcion, was to rescue manking from the imperfect creative effort of this Old Testament demiurge. ..... Marcion's 'new Christianity' appealed to those wishing to detach themselves from the cruel God of Jewish scripture; however, it made Marcion many enemies...None of Marcion's writings have survived destruction... ------------------ "Ah, there's nothing more exciting than science. You get all the fun of... sitting still, being quiet, writing down numbers, paying attention... Science has it all." - Seymour Skinner, The Simpsons [This message has been edited by Eximius, 09-09-2003]
|
Adminnemooseus
Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: 09-26-2002
|
|
|
Message 4 of 91 (54642)
09-09-2003 9:50 PM
|
|
|
Thread moved here from the Evolution forum.
|
Rei
Member (Idle past 7039 days) Posts: 1546 From: Iowa City, IA Joined: 09-03-2003
|
One thing that really bothers me...
... about that parable, is that God told them that if they eat from the tree they'd die. The serpent told them that if they ate from the tree, they wouldn't die, but their eyes would be open, and that they'd know good and evil. They ate from the tree. They didn't die, but their eyes were opened, and they knew good from evil. God, upon hearing this, modified humans so that they would die. But - the snake was right! And God rigged the game afterwards.And when did God tell Eve not to eat from the tree? Off-camera? Of course, I love the anthromorphism in the story. It was God deliberately pretending to be humanlike for some reason, right? "Where are you?", walking around, making noise, not knowing answers, etc? What a skit! Not to mention that his challenge was to someone he created who didn't know good from evil, to know good from evil.... And why on earth were *snakes* being punished? Because Satan took the form of one (as most Christians interperit that parable)? That makes no sense at all. And let's not get into Gen. 3:16... NIV tries to soften it, but the Hebrew isn't so generous. This story is troubling on so many levels. ------------------ "Illuminant light, illuminate me."
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 7 by Zealot, posted 11-16-2003 3:47 PM | | Rei has not replied |
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
Q. Why, if God loved his creation, could he act so carelessly?
A. Why he was testing humankind.
Yes, He knew they would fail. He also knew they would need a redeemer, hence The Lord. Freedom of choice. You are not forced to love God, you can live this life as you please.
R. Really. I only count two that were tested. The rest of us weren't born yet and I don't see the logic of my suffering for the mistakes of people long before I came on board.
A common belief is that if any of us were placed in Adam/Eve's 'shoes' , we would do the same. We would also eat from the tree. Hence we all share the sin.
Q. Well, if so then why didn't God sterilize one or both to stop the spread of evil?
A. Oh, God couldn't do such a terrible thing.
Nothing to do with genetics.
Q. But he could drown most all life on earth in the flood of Noah?
And ? Again He will destroy most all life on Earth.
Maybe fundamentalist should consider circular filing the Old Testament and concentrate on the words of Jesus Christ.
Jesus said "all have sinned" and I think it is a very poor showing of faith when one has to resort to the Old Testament to confirm what Jesus said.
Why would Jesus have to save us then ? PS Charles, If you just want to vent out your frustrations at God, you've probably come to the right place. If however you want sincere answers however, there are far better web forums to ask. Perhaps you can even pray, then open your Bible and read. cheers Z
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 7 of 91 (66882)
11-16-2003 3:47 PM
|
Reply to: Message 5 by Rei
09-10-2003 6:20 PM
|
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
They ate from the tree. They didn't die, but their eyes were opened, and they knew good from evil. God, upon hearing this, modified humans so that they would die. But - the snake was right!
Gen 3 vs 4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die. Adam and Eve became mortal and died. God's Word came true.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 5 by Rei, posted 09-10-2003 6:20 PM | | Rei has not replied |
|
Chiroptera
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 8 of 91 (66885)
11-16-2003 3:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 6 by Zealot
11-16-2003 3:40 PM
|
|
quote:
I only count two that were tested. The rest of us weren't born yet and I don't see the logic of my suffering for the mistakes of people long before I came on board. A common belief is that if any of us were placed in Adam/Eve's 'shoes' , we would do the same. We would also eat from the tree. Hence we all share the sin.
Rubbish. Adam and Eve got to take the test. We should all get the chance to pass it. Face it, even if Christianity were true, this story only makes sense metaphorically.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 6 by Zealot, posted 11-16-2003 3:40 PM | | Zealot has not replied |
|
JustinC
Member (Idle past 4870 days) Posts: 624 From: Pittsburgh, PA, USA Joined: 07-21-2003
|
|
|
Message 9 of 91 (66888)
11-16-2003 4:21 PM
|
|
|
Kindof undermines free will if we all would do it-seems like God designed us so poorly that we would all turn on him. It also opens the door that God can start punishing us for all of our hypothetical instances. Is God going to tell me when I die, "You did pretty good with the whole "do not sin" rule in your actual life, but man...your hypothetical actions are just atrocious. In light of that, I'm going to send you to hell" It's also wierd that when I bring this up to Christians, they all tell me they are 100 percent sure that they would eat the fruit and hence deserve to be punished. Talk about your views bending so that your belief won't be irrational! JustinC
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1493 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
|
|
Message 10 of 91 (66896)
11-16-2003 5:05 PM
|
Reply to: Message 7 by Zealot
11-16-2003 3:47 PM
|
|
Adam and Eve became mortal and died. God's Word came true. But they didn't die that day. Which is what God says will happen:
quote:
16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die."
So God's word didn't come true. After all if somebody said "Don't eat that orange, you'll die if you do", wouldn't you take that to mean that you'll die the minute - the day, at least -you ate the orange? And if I came by and said "whoever told you that you'll die is wrong. You can eat the orange." And if you did eat it, and didn't die, wouldn't you conclude I was right? Why does the meaning of those utterances change when we're talking about different fruit?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 7 by Zealot, posted 11-16-2003 3:47 PM | | Zealot has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 13 by Zealot, posted 11-17-2003 9:26 AM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
Chiroptera
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 11 of 91 (66898)
11-16-2003 5:08 PM
|
|
|
I have a question. Suppose that Adam and Eve didn't eat the fruit. But several generations later, one of their descendents did. Then would we have two groups of people, an immortal sinless group, and a sinful, mortal group? And would God have to sacrifice himself for the salvation of the sinful group? Could one of the sinless humans volunteer to do it?
|
Charles Munroe
Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 40 From: Simi Valley, CA USA Joined: 09-07-2003
|
|
|
Message 12 of 91 (66954)
11-16-2003 10:20 PM
|
Reply to: Message 6 by Zealot
11-16-2003 3:40 PM
|
|
Responding to Zealot
Zealot : I had to read your message several times. I just couldn't believe what I read. You stated that if given the chance everyone of us would have eatten of the fruit (by the way it wasn't an Apple, the text says fruit only). OK! According to your way of looking at things it is perfectly OK for the district attorney to swear out a warrant for the arrest of a person because "if given the chance to commit a crime that person would do so". Whoaaa!!!
Then to compund your brilliance you make the statement that I have a frustration with GOD.I suggest you go back to my message and reread it. I have no problem with Jesus I do have a problem with text that makes GOD out to be on the same mental and moral level as any of the murderous despots of history. I have trouble with text that clearly states that GOD screwed up, failed to take action that even the village idiot would have had sense enough to employ. If you would bother to read the text evil was already in the world before Adam or Eve ate of the fruit. Now who do you supposed created the devil? Sure wasn't Adam or Eve or you or me. Who was it that failed to inform Adam that the serpent was an evil creature and not to be trusted?
No, Zealot I have no problem with Jesus but massive problems with the Old Testament that approves of slavery, genecide, killing of witches and other ugly things. I don't see any need to pray to a God that murders people, particularly little children as in the Noah flood. Thanks but I'll stick with Jesus, you can keep that beast you refer to as GOD.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 6 by Zealot, posted 11-16-2003 3:40 PM | | Zealot has replied |
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 13 of 91 (67029)
11-17-2003 9:26 AM
|
Reply to: Message 10 by crashfrog
11-16-2003 5:05 PM
|
|
After all if somebody said "Don't eat that orange, you'll die if you do", wouldn't you take that to mean that you'll die the minute - the day, at least -you ate the orange? And if I came by and said "whoever told you that you'll die is wrong. You can eat the orange." And if you did eat it, and didn't die, wouldn't you conclude I was right?
Considering Adam and Eve were immortals, the transition from immortal to mortal would imply that when they eat from it, they would start dying, from that very day.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 10 by crashfrog, posted 11-16-2003 5:05 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 14 of 91 (67030)
11-17-2003 9:30 AM
|
Reply to: Message 7 by Zealot
11-16-2003 3:47 PM
|
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
quote:
Adam and Eve became mortal and died.
Then why did God also want to keep them away from the fruit of the tree of life? Wasn't the risk that they would "take also of the tree of life and eat, and live for ever"? How could it make them live for ever if they would have already done that anyway?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 7 by Zealot, posted 11-16-2003 3:47 PM | | Zealot has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 16 by Zealot, posted 11-17-2003 10:00 AM | | Dan Carroll has replied | | | Message 19 by Zealot, posted 11-17-2003 10:43 AM | | Dan Carroll has replied |
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
Re: Responding to Zealot
Why did I think you actually cared about discussing the text. Christian bashing, I introduce to you Mr Munroe...
OK! According to your way of looking at things it is perfectly OK for the district attorney to swear out a warrant for the arrest of a person because "if given the chance to commit a crime that person would do so". Whoaaa!!!
Yeah, equate God's Will to that of a district attorney. Good analysis.
Then to compund your brilliance you make the statement that I have a frustration with GOD.
Shall we call each other names every post ? Be a big boy now ok ?
I suggest you go back to my message and reread it. I have no problem with Jesus I do have a problem with text that makes GOD out to be on the same mental and moral level as any of the murderous despots of history
God created the forbidden tree, yet had no idea that Adam and Eve would eat from it ? No Idea the serpent would temp them ? What do you think ? He only told them they would DIE (which they did) if they are from the tree. They chose to disobey their creator. When you are unable to follow simple commands, dont cry when things dont work out your way.
No, Zealot I have no problem with Jesus but massive problems with the Old Testament that approves of slavery, genecide, killing of witches and other ugly things. I don't see any need to pray to a God that murders people, particularly little children as in the Noah flood. Thanks but I'll stick with Jesus, you can keep that beast you refer to as GOD.
The Lord killed Aaron's sons. Do you not have a problem with that ? I take it you don't believe in Hell either. PS: My father is an identical twin (white). He grew up in a little place called Swaziland (Southern Africa) , home of the famous Zulu nation. When he was 3+, the local witchdoctor wanted to capture him and his brother and make medicine out of them (blond twins make good medicine I hear). Fortunitely his guardian (also a Zulu) heard about this plot and prevented it. Today children are still used as medicine in certain cultures. Poor witches huh ?
|
™ Version 4.2