|
Author
|
Topic: Why Creationism
|
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 |
|
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 |
|
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 ?
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
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"?
Dan, please quote which verses you are referring to. thanks
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
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?
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.' 23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24 So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the garden of Eden the cherubim, and the flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way to the tree of life. Tree of life <> Tree of Knowlege. The Tree of Life could have been a 'fountain of youth', preventing ageing while they were in paradise. Once Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowlege and thus could distinguish good from evil, they would not be allowed to live in paradise anymore , hence Gen 23 to 24.
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
It doesn't say anything about preventing aging. But it does say it prevents death. (i.e., allows them to live forever.)
We have no idea what it did. Whether prevent ageing, actually reversing ageing or preveinting dying. A Tree of life that would allow ageing and prevent dying seems futile.
They were forbidden to eat from the tree of life. Why would that be a concern if they already weren't going to die?
They were forceably forbidden eating from the 'Tree of Life' only after they ate from the tree of Knowlege. They could well have eaten from the tree of life whilst in paradise. It could be what kept them immortal. The idea that they could suffer on Earth infinitely (by having access to the tree of life) was not acceptable.
This leads to another big question about the bible in general... if immortality is the only thing that keeps us from being like God, then why aren't we able to disagree with his rules of morality and sin? According to his own words, we are like him as far as knowledge of good and evil goes.
Again you need to quote text Dan.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 20 by Dan Carroll, posted 11-17-2003 10:47 AM | | Dan Carroll has replied |
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 25 of 91 (67135)
11-17-2003 4:11 PM
|
Reply to: Message 23 by crashfrog
11-17-2003 3:43 PM
|
|
It literally says they'll die that day. Not that they'll start dying.
Yes, but what death was He talking about ? Death to the grave, or spiritual death ? Since the original sin, man needs to be 'reborn' to find God. Or was He literally talking about 2 immortals becoming mortal ? Kinda difficult seeing as you are not dealing with everyday humans.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 23 by crashfrog, posted 11-17-2003 3:43 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
"Live for ever." Pretty straightforward. Anything else is supposition.
So.. live for ever AND age or live for ever without ageing ?
So... what, it would require continuous eating of the fruit of life to remain immortal? Or they only had to eat it once, but it only worked inside the garden? That doesn't make much sense, does it?
Shall we go with continuously eating it ? Or would you like to know if the tree of life only provides life to mortals and not immortals ? What if Adam and Eve again ate from the Tree of Knowlege. Would it have another effect on them ? Adam and Eve must have died in a way for the tree of life to 'give them life' no ? You decide and when you're ready to say its non-sense, feel free 
We know good and evil just like God. This is from God's own lips. So why can't we make our own decisions as to what's good and what's evil?
You can indeed convince yourself that something is not evil and after a while, you might even believe that. But you're deceiving only yourself.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 22 by Dan Carroll, posted 11-17-2003 11:58 AM | | Dan Carroll has replied |
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 29 of 91 (67148)
11-17-2003 4:38 PM
|
Reply to: Message 27 by crashfrog
11-17-2003 4:18 PM
|
|
What death did you think I was talking about when I said it? If I was talking about a metaphorical, not literal, death, wouldn't I have said so when I said it?
Its of little importance what death YOU are talking about, the importance is what death HE was talking about.
But I didn't qualify "death", and neither does God. I think it's safe to assume, therefore, that we're both talking about the same kind of death.
If God talked about a literal death (IE: Adam falling to the ground choking), he would have died that day. Your options are spiritual death, or removal of immortality. z
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 27 by crashfrog, posted 11-17-2003 4:18 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
Does it matter? Either way, there was a clear risk that God wanted to avoid... Adam and Eve not dying. If they were already not going to die, then why would God have to prevent them from not dying?
God was only concerned about Adam and Eve not dying AFTER they ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowlege and were to be expelled from the garden of Eden !
See above. The fruit, as it is stated in the text, says it would allow them to live for ever. It doesn't say a thing about giving life where there is none. So what's the risk if they already weren't going to die?
The text you are referring to occurs after they ate from the tree of Knowlege. When you eat from the tree of Knowlege, you die.
I don't see why I would be deceiving myself. According to God, my knowledge of good and evil is the same as his. So what prevents my decisions on the subject from being as valid as his?
Sin.
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
So what? There's no indication in the text that they were immortal before they ate it.
They were allowed to eat of any tree, including the Tree of Life before the fall. They were not allowed to eat of the Tree of life after the fall. They were immortal.
Care to elaborate? Because as it stands, it's circular logic. What prevents my definition of sin as being valid is a different definition of sin?
Your judgements are affected by sin, God's are not.
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 87 of 91 (69008)
11-24-2003 4:02 PM
|
Reply to: Message 56 by sidelined
11-18-2003 12:04 PM
|
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
Sidelined. IM off for a long time soon, so I wont be able to reply. So make the most of what I say
Excuse me but how do you explain the logical error here? You state that they were immortal even though there is no verse within the bible to back this up.
Does there have to be a verse that spells it out for you ? They could eat from the TREE OF LIFE anytime when they were in paradise, but not when ejected. They were PROHIBITED eating from the tree of life when they were ejected because if they did , they would be IMMORTAL. By Immortal I am referring to a fountain of youth.
Now in the same paragraph you state that they were not allowed to eat of the tree of life after the fall.If they are immortal then why deny them the tree.
The Tree of life could be LIFE PROVIDING aslong as you eat from it. IE: a Fountain of Youth. Imagine a banana that prevents you from ageing OR reverses ageing. It allows you immortality AS LONG AS YOU CONTINUE EATING FROM IT.
You cannot state that they had already eaten of the tree before the fall otherwise you contradict this passage.
I just did. I am not talking about a 'eat once live forever' tree of life, think of it as 'Nivea anti-wrinkle cream', only it makes every bit of you young.
You have posted yourself into a quandry here old chap.Please explain yourself.
Logical deduction. If you read any of my other posts, you would have realised that I did indeed oppose the notion that once you eat from the tree of life , you would be "unable to die". I'm merely saying that the tree of life could prolong life indefinitely. cheers If you have difficulty with this, there is nothing more to discuss.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 56 by sidelined, posted 11-18-2003 12:04 PM | | sidelined has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 88 by zephyr, posted 11-24-2003 4:45 PM | | Zealot has replied |
|
Zealot
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 89 of 91 (69176)
11-25-2003 9:26 AM
|
Reply to: Message 88 by zephyr
11-24-2003 4:45 PM
|
|
Re: One thing that really bothers me...
This is typical dogmatic arrogance. The implication is that anyone who has not been taught to interpolate meaning the way you do is a godless heathen blinded by unbelief. Either that or they have a mental deficiency. Which implication were you going for?
When you choose not to believe something because it doesn't explicity state it in your preferred terms, then should I take pity ? God mentiones NOTHING about abortion in the bible, so it is ok! Closing yourself to the obvious does not deserve empathy.
The fact is, if you argue for a literal interpretation of the book, it is quite reasonable to expect that everything be spelled out. Especially since there are so many parts of the story which are, in fact, spelled out in detail.
You can also argue that pre-marital sex is not wrong. Afterall it does not state that it explicitly in the Bible does it ? You can ignore every other verse thrown at you if you're only going to accept "sex before marriage is sin".
Zealot, explain this to me: why does God say that they need to be ejected from the garden, lest they also eat of the tree of life, and live forever?
They have just eaten from the Tree of Knowlege. Their eating of the tree of knowlege AND the Tree of Life is problematic. Not their eating from the tree of Life, which they were allowed to eat from . "also of the tree of life" : "also" is used as it it refers back to their eating from the tree of knowlege. Tree of Knowlege and ALSO Tree of Life. Can you tell me then. Why did they then not eat from the tree of life, if they were allowed to eat from any tree in Pariadise BUT the tree of knowlege ?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 88 by zephyr, posted 11-24-2003 4:45 PM | | zephyr has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 90 by zephyr, posted 11-25-2003 7:29 PM | | Zealot has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2