Are we prisoners of sin

I am confused. So Eve ate the fruit but had broken no law as no law had ben given to her?Is that correct? Why did he conclude that if the fruit prohibition law had only been stipulated to him?Was Eve going to be punished by God and die for eating the fruit or not?If Adam did not eat the fruit after Eve would all have remained OK in Eden? Well once Eve had been deceived into eating the fruit what exactly were Gods desires? This is very unclear.Did God wish that Eve die for eating fruit despite not being told this law?Or did God desire that after Eve had eaten the fruit that Adam continue to resist and the two live happily ever after in paradise? Frankly if there is a God, it is the inability of God to make his laws and desires equally clear to all men (and women) that is the major cause for so many not following him.Bad leadership by any measure.......

So Adam assumed that eating the fruit carried the death penalty for Eve as well as himself. So Adam assumed wrongly that Eve would be executed. This little misunderstanding of God's rules caused Adam to make the choice that led all of us all to pay the ultimate price. Really?But even the first man completely misunderstood the one rule given to him.This hardly suggests the clarity and certainty of God's rules that you claim.Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

ICANT your incredible ability to contradict yourself is matched only by your bewildering inability to recognise this when it occurs. The only words used to draw my conclusion in this discussion are your own. Yet, according to you, Adam assumed this WRONGLY because in fact no punishment at all would have occurred if Eve alone had eaten the forbidden fruit.Correct?Let us review your previous responses: So once again we must conclude that the law specified by God, the law that you claim to be so clear and unambiguous, was completely misunderstood by Adam with regard to it's application to Eve. Adam wrongly concluded this. According to your previous statements. But he would not have been without her as no punishment of Eve would have occurred if she alone had eaten the fruit. According to your previous statements. A choice made on a false conclusion. A conclusion borne from misunderstanding the application and punishment of God's single law as applied to Eve.So, according to you, the whole of human fate and man's sinful nature is a result of God's original law and it's application being wholly unclear to the original man.If this is not what you are saying then please explain how we can draw any other conclusion?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

I don't know if the particular interpretation being proposed here by ICANT is widely accepted in biblical literalist circles or not.But the inherent contradiction in ICANT's thinking - God's rules and punishments are unequivocal, clear and unambiguous to all. Yet the whole of human fate is the direct result of Adam having completely misinterpreted God's original rule as applied to Eve - Is plain for all to see.It only remains to be seen whether ICANT will choose to just ignore this contradiction, contort his original claims in an attempt to minimise the damage or acknowledge the flaw in his thinking and move on.

By accepting that faith in God and the his message (whether derived from the bible or otherwise) are not the products of "reason" or "reasonable conclusions" in the strict sense of the term "reasonable" (i.e. the product of reason and rationality). Maybe. Maybe not.Whether one thinks that the story does have a purpose or not will in most cases depend on ones religious inclinations.Even if one accepts that the story does have a a purpose (and I think I would accept that it does - at least to some extent) then the exact nature of that purpose and whether or not this purpose is the product of man or God both remain major bones of contention. The fact that the conclusions drawn from a particular proposition being true are considered undesirable should not be mistaken for evidence that the proposition is in fact untrue.Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

Please bear this assertion in mind when reading the very next sentance in Cedre's post! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh the irony.........