|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,482 Year: 3,739/9,624 Month: 610/974 Week: 223/276 Day: 63/34 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Did Adam and eve really have a choice? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1305 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
So God/the bible doesn't explicitly say that "the fall" is a gift then?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The Bible doesn't really say that Genesis was a Fall.
Most of the stuff about the wars in heaven and the fight where Satan got thrown down and all that stuff comes from The First Book of Enoch and First Adam & Eve. The Bible says little explicitly. It's a collection of folk tales. Particularly the OT. Genesis is a classic story just like the Just So Stories. They are an attempt to explain the world around the authors. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1305 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
I would tend to agree.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1963 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Crevo writes: Yes, and this supposed Free will has brought about man's fall. I have been contending that God is responsible for the fall seeing as he controlled At least indrectly, every contributing factor to the Fall. If God is responsible for the fall he is responsible for all the suffering and cruelty in the world. as without the fall we would have remained in paradise, no? Crevo writes: A 'truely impartial' observer would not accept a 2000 year old manuscript as evidence. They would need proveable, verifiable evidence. If they believed what was in the bible at face value they would not be impartial. I've rearranged your post to show the contradiction. You are arguing internally with respect to Genesis all the way through this thread. Then you step outside to say it's some old tale. That it is "some old tale" is a valid a response in a thread possibly entitled "The Bible is true". But not in an biblically internal discussion. This action of going external is an illogical escape hatch... there was no need to use it. The discussion was stalemated anyway.
Hoping to turn me were you? I can't turn anyone. God turns folk to him not man. Me, I'm a signpost "Jesus wept" John 11:35. It's the shortest verse in the Bible. What caused him to weep? Anothers death....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1963 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Crevo writes: I would tend to agree. Be wary of Jars logic Crevo. Jar will pose views about God, the means of salvation etc and use quotes from the Bible and argue that they mean specific things. Then he'll say it's fairytale. Ask yourself the question: how can someone hope to comment accurately about anything regarding God when they say the material on which they rely to glean any knowledge about him - is all suspect. If he says not all of it should be considered suspect, ask him how he knows which is which and on what basis he trusts this knowledge. Catch 22. Either trust the Bible is the word of God and get down to the nitty gritty of figuring out what it means - or don't accept that which means none of it can be trusted and objective comment is impossible. Of course one can decide to hold fire one way or the other and retain the right to check it out, ie: examine it internally on the one hand, whilst maintaining overall disbelief when the 'study period' ends. But that isn't what Jar does. He talks using objective terminology. Which he cannot do. "Jesus wept" John 11:35. It's the shortest verse in the Bible. What caused him to weep? Anothers death....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Catch 22. Either trust the Bible is the word of God and get down to the nitty gritty of figuring out what it means - or don't accept that which means none of it can be trusted and objective comment is impossible. May I re-word this? Either trust the Holy Bible is the word of God despite the fact that it does not claim to be- or trust that the Holy Bible is the word of Man, passed on by oral tradition from prophets who were in direct communication with God. If we accept the latter we can get down to the nitty gritty of figuring out what it means.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1963 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
modulous writes: May I re-word this? You may.
Either trust the Holy Bible is the word of God despite the fact that it does not claim to be- or trust that the Holy Bible is the word of Man, passed on by oral tradition from prophets who were in direct communication with God. If we accept the latter we can get down to the nitty gritty of figuring out what it means. I can't see how it makes any difference what one actually believes about the Bible when it comes to finding out what it says. My point was that its arguments can only be evaluated internally, examined with a view to how it fits together with itself (as if, even if it is accepted only for the purposes of intellectual assessment, it is the word of God). As soon as one moves outside that frame of reference then no conclusions can be arrived at. Only speculation. What can one say about the picture formed by a jigsaw with an infinite amount of pieces.. I can't see much prophet in that "Jesus wept" John 11:35. It's the shortest verse in the Bible. What caused him to weep? Anothers death....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1305 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
iano writes:
Iano, you went off the point, not me, you introduced the notion of a 'truly impartial' observer, not me. 'Truly impartial' suggests to me having no preconceptions. That cannot be said of someone who believes the bible is truth.
I've rearranged your post to show the contradiction iano writes:
I can't agree with this... as I said, a "truly impartial" observer would reach no such conclusion. The notion of a truly impartial observer has no place in a discussion like this. that is the point I was making. A truly impartial observer, looking at the evidence as he finds it and who doesn't force things were they don't want to go, who doesn't let his own pre-disposition rule his judgement - would conclude man had choice. Not the opposite. You are saying, as far as I can see, that man had to have had a choice because otherwise nothing makes sense, That is exactly the point I am making. The difference is you are making the choice/no choice option fit your desired end, turning away from the possibility simply because it makes your position untenable. (probobly a typical Christian attitude to challenges?). What I am trying to do is look at what supposedly happened in Eden, and trying to make sense of the apparent contradictions without making it fit any preconception I may/may not have.If i follow the story through, i.e. God made the universe and everything in it God knew this particualr situation would arise (the temptation). God knew what the outcome would be. God knew that man would be punished for all eternity. God knew all this before it even happened. God knew there would be no other outcome. Thus any "choice" on the part of adam and eve was an illusion. I agree this makes the notion of an all loving and all seeing god a nonsense, but that is my point. The fact that the story of genesis does just this, (makes a nonsense of the traditional view of God). Is not an argument against 'no-choice' it is merely the resulting outcome.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1305 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
iano writes:
Seems to me that this is what every christian i have ever met does in varying degrees. The minute you stop taking the Bible 100% literally, word for word.. no metaphor or allegory, you are headed on this path and thus your opinion begins to become just that. Your Opinion, nothing more. If he says not all of it should be considered suspect, ask him how he knows which is which and on what basis he trusts this knowledge This message has been edited by Creavolution, 10-05-2005 10:57 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
ask him how he knows which is which and on what basis he trusts this knowledge. You know, YOU could ask him yourself. Perhaps you can show him the error of his ways. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: But I have exactly the same knowledge of good and evil as God, so I have used that ability (which is the same as God's) to judge His actions. Therefore, the fact that he killed EVERYTHING on the planet, even the babies in their mothers' wombs, even the animals, even the plants, for goodness sake, leads me to the opinion that the Flood was not a rightous act. It was incredibly cruel and rather sadistic. And God clearly calls it a mistake that he made humans, althogh why he also had to destroy all the animals and the plants too, which seemed to not have done anything wrong, I really don't get.
Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. Wy does God need to repent if he hasn't made a mistake?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
How do you know God hasn't created automatons who only believe they have free will? quote: That is exactly what an automaton that only thinks they have free will would believe.
quote: I do not think that someone who rejects science in favor of a 2000 year old nomadic sheepherder's religion is in any position to be playing the "logic card" at this juncture. If you are going to claim "God used his super powers" to explain away most of modern science, I think that my proposition is perfectly valid using your standards of evidence and explanation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Do all humans have the same ability as God, to Know Good from Evil, because Adam and Eve ater of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and became "as God", or not? If we do, then our "opinion" of the plan is certainly valid, because we have the same ability as God to judge it as Good or Evil. If not, then is Genesis incorrect in saying that humanity has the same ability as God to judge Good from Evil?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: ...a major source of needles guilt and shame, justification for persecution, genocide, slavery, torture subjegation, sexism, racism, and all-around injustice...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nighttrain Member (Idle past 4016 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: |
Wonder if God ever repented of missing the chance to vaccinate Noah and Co., the two-by-twoers and the sevens,and use the flood to exterminate disease?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024