-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Didn't Satan Give Us Freewill?
- Thread starter The Sum of Awe
- Start date
Heathen Hammer
Nope, you're still wrong
This is arguing over who is actually responsible. It's a rational examination of the placing of moral responsibility, not an argument over the definition of words as we occasionally devolve into.
Since in a moral sense it's all actually God's fault, and the intent of the myth isn't correct as you perceive it, suddenly 'it's all semantics'. Poor dodge! The heart of this argument are the holes in the story, not merely poor penmanship or grammar.
Since in a moral sense it's all actually God's fault, and the intent of the myth isn't correct as you perceive it, suddenly 'it's all semantics'. Poor dodge! The heart of this argument are the holes in the story, not merely poor penmanship or grammar.
Last edited:
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
the problem here is that your preconceived ideas override the story and thus you see holes in the story
others of us accept the story as the basis for truth....not the other way around...hence, no holes.
Heathen Hammer
Nope, you're still wrong
The problem is YOU [since your life depends on this book being accurate] also have preconceived ideas and are thus, blind to the holes
Truth comes from accuracy, not 'fudging the results'. And let us not appeal to numbers, for the thousandth time. [heehee]
[edit] And btw, my preconceived ideas were conceived by the holes found in the story.
Last edited:
But it's only the believers who keep changing the definitions of words.
Would you give one example to which you are referring ^above^?
Bible standard is: Matthew 18v16
....out of the mouth of two or three witnesses [Bible writers] a thing is established
In other words, what one says so does the other.
There will be a parallel reference verse or passage to follow.
If we were Not created as free moral agents, then yes,
then God could have created us as robots or automatons.
Robots have No choice whereas we do.
How could we show love [or hate] for God is we had No free will to choose ?
In other words, God has forced No one to obey him or Not obey him.
We choose that in a moral sense of our own voluntary free will.
-Deuteronomy 30v19; 32v5
Didn't Adam know he was 'made from the dust of the earth' according to Genesis 2v7 'dust from the ground' ?
So, when told at verse 17 surely he will die that would mean death.
Adam knew he did not exist [live] before God breathed the breath of life into Adam.
Job [34v15] knew death would be back to the dust again.
Adam was created ADULT not as a minor child.
So, what would a small child have to do with the biblical account in Eden ?
Daviso452
Boy Genius
But your accepting of it as truth is a preconceived idea.
Heathen Hammer
Nope, you're still wrong
pay attention to what I was actually responding to.
The issue was that Adam was incapable of understanding moral choice, as he was deprived of that knowledge. Not where he came from or that he would return.
A small child is unaware of sophisticated moral concepts like good, evil, and disobedience. Adam was exactly the same as a child. In fact, God kept him ignorant of these concepts on purpose.
Heathen Hammer
Nope, you're still wrong
Adam was not created as a free moral agent. he did not possess morals. He was ignorant of Good and Evil.
WE did not choose any such thing. I certainly would have made the intelligent choice. However, I am also a being living post-Tree eating. So it is impossible for us to know. You do not actually understand the moral underpinnings of the tale as it's actually presented.
Adam and Eve by eating of the tree of knowledge of good and bad were rejecting God's sovereignty over them in favor of listening to or obeying being under Satan's rule as a rival sovereignty. Instead of having God's guidance and direction, now Adam and Eve would guide themselves or self-determine for themselves what is good or bad.
Genesis chapter two God told Adam what was good for him, so Adam was not ignorant of what was right conduct. Adam knew the rules of conduct. Adam was capable of conforming to God's rule. Adam even used his intelligence to form names for the animals
[Gen 2vs19,20]
Since we are all living post-tree eating, No matter how hard we try to do what is right we make mistakes. Paul even lamented that the good he wished to do he did not do, but the bad that he did not wish to do he did. Our leanings are all toward our imperfect sinful nature. Sin's law is always leaning us to do wrong. Genetically No one has a sinless nature. It's like having a sin-like birth defect. Who can deny or change that ?
Sin's cure lies not in a physical way, but by taking care of one's spirituality.
Like a car with a warranty. One is still obligated to maintain requirements.
If we want want to be sound spiritually we are morally required to obey God's requirements for what is best for all as Jesus taught us the distinction between right and wrong.
Not only does one reap good now by sowing good now, but taking care of one's spiritually will lead to having the prospect of gaining everlasting life either by resurrection, or by being one of the living righteous 'sheep' still alive on earth at the time of divine involvement into mankind's affairs, and can remain alive on earth right into the start of Jesus 1000-year reign over a peaceful paradisaic earth.
-Matthew 25vs31,32
Heathen Hammer
Nope, you're still wrong
None of that nonsense explains away how they were ignorant of actual moral judgement and thus could not have made a moral choice. They were not adults [they were merely conjured in the shape of adults; they had zero life experience]; they were not educated; they had no cultural reference, and were, as I showed, deliberately kept ignorant.
the idea of "challenging God's sovereignty" is simply even MORE preposterous. And, frankly, it's just a clumsy apologetic re-word of the exact same thing: disobedience. Rewording it doesn't make the problem go away.
God told them one thing; the serpent told them another. They simply reacted to whatever nice proposition was placed in front of them at the time, just like any other child does.
They had no reason not to trust what the serpent said. He was just another creature in the Garden, just like them. And he told the truth, so...
the idea of "challenging God's sovereignty" is simply even MORE preposterous. And, frankly, it's just a clumsy apologetic re-word of the exact same thing: disobedience. Rewording it doesn't make the problem go away.
God told them one thing; the serpent told them another. They simply reacted to whatever nice proposition was placed in front of them at the time, just like any other child does.
They had no reason not to trust what the serpent said. He was just another creature in the Garden, just like them. And he told the truth, so...
Last edited:
Heathen Hammer
Nope, you're still wrong
Ignorant of Good and Evil. Thus, had no grasp of morals. Your Chewbaca defense is invalid. Court dismissed.
More than enough reason Not to trust the serpent because before chapter 3 in Genesis at chapter 2v17 Adam was already taught you sin you die.
Eve should have thought it rather odd that a serpent was talking to her.
Didn't Eve answer the serpent correctly at Genesis 3 vs2,3 ?
Heathen Hammer
Nope, you're still wrong
He didn't know what 'to die' was either. And no, he could not mistrust the serpent, because he was ignorant of the concept. Because he did not know good and evil. That knowledge is necessary for distrust.
Sure she did. But a child repeats things too, without knowing what they mean.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu-yRVDflbI
Eve was created as an adult woman who God married to Adam [Gen 2v24]
According to 1st Timothy [2v14] Adam was Not deceived, but Eve was deceived.
Didn't the dinosaurs die? They lived and died long before Adam.
Animals, birds, nor insects, were ever offered everlasting life.
The Eden nor the earth was not an overpopulated animal zoo.
Adam could have easily discerned by the death of insects, birds and animals besides temporary plant life what death was.
P.S. Even a child stepping on a bug can observe what death is.
The child has no understanding of it was "alive" now it's "dead", they are words. Your analogy of a child is unintentionally accurate though, they were children without knowledge. If a two year old does something wrong we don't punish them, we try to help them realise what and why it was wrong. Not much of a parent your god?
Heathen Hammer
Nope, you're still wrong
Fishy handled it.
Ura, please, don't try adding in the scientifically accurate account of the dinosaurs and try relating it to the myth of Adam and Eve. There is no temporal comparison because Adam and Eve never actually existed.
Disobedience and death are advanced concepts, and Adam and Eve were deliberately kept ignorant of many such things. that's what the story says, deal with it.
Adam and Eve were Not created as 2 yr olds.
Adam and the woman Eve were created as marriage-age adults.
-Gen. 2vs23,24