Thoughts on the Fall of Adam

[nPeace]

All your gonna get for a response from ancient soul is mocking redicule.

Well for the most part, that's what you get from those against the Biblical God, and his book. So we don't expect humility, and in fact it is clear that some, their ego is bursting at the seams, as they try desperately to support their anti-god religion.

Of course, their pride won't allow them to readily admit it, but some who belonged (I say belonged because some obviously are changing their minds as the evidence becomes clearer, and they no longer see the need to hide behind Atheism) to their camp do.
Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion — a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint — and Mr. Gish [Duane T. Gish the Creation Scientist] is but one of many to make it — the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. - Michael Ruse

Transcript:
Speech by Professor Michael Ruse
...I think that we should recognize, both historically and perhaps philosophically, certainly that the science side has certain metaphysical assumptions built into doing science, which -- it may not be a good thing to admit in a court of law -- but I think that in honesty that we should recognize, and that we should be thinking about some of these sorts of things.
.........
Certainly, historically, that if you look at, say, evolutionary theory, and of course this was brought out I think rather nicely by the talk just before me, it's certainly been the case that evolution has functioned, if not as a religion as such, certainly with elements akin to a secular religion. Those of us who teach philosophy of religion always say there's no way of defining religion by a neat, necessary and sufficient condition. The best that you can do is list a number of characteristics, some of which all religions have, and none of which any religion, whatever or however you sort of put it. And certainly, there's no doubt about it, that in the past, and I think also in the present, for many evolutionists, evolution has functioned as something with elements which are, let us say, akin to being a secular religion.

 

[Jollybear]

Well for the most part, that's what you get from those against the Biblical God, and his book. So we don't expect humility, and in fact it is clear that some, their ego is bursting at the seams, as they try desperately to support their anti-god religion.

Of course, their pride won't allow them to readily admit it, but some who belonged (I say belonged because some obviously are changing their minds as the evidence becomes clearer, and they no longer see the need to hide behind Atheism) to their camp do.
Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion — a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint — and Mr. Gish [Duane T. Gish the Creation Scientist] is but one of many to make it — the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. - Michael Ruse

Transcript:
Speech by Professor Michael Ruse
...I think that we should recognize, both historically and perhaps philosophically, certainly that the science side has certain metaphysical assumptions built into doing science, which -- it may not be a good thing to admit in a court of law -- but I think that in honesty that we should recognize, and that we should be thinking about some of these sorts of things.
.........
Certainly, historically, that if you look at, say, evolutionary theory, and of course this was brought out I think rather nicely by the talk just before me, it's certainly been the case that evolution has functioned, if not as a religion as such, certainly with elements akin to a secular religion. Those of us who teach philosophy of religion always say there's no way of defining religion by a neat, necessary and sufficient condition. The best that you can do is list a number of characteristics, some of which all religions have, and none of which any religion, whatever or however you sort of put it. And certainly, there's no doubt about it, that in the past, and I think also in the present, for many evolutionists, evolution has functioned as something with elements which are, let us say, akin to being a secular religion.

This is very true.....

Alot of time i try to rack my brain wondering how much of this anti-bible additude is dishonesty, ignorence, or stupidity.

I guess its a case by case basis. I do see the signs of what the bible says like "the god of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers".

Dishonesty is not a blindness because they KNOW or SEE there doing it. Ignorence and stupidity IS a blindness because they dont see it. Pride could be a blindness too. Although i think some cases it can see.

But, ultimately, dishonesty and pride is still blind because those doing it cannot see that it shoots themselves in the foot.

But, ya know, when they dialogue like this, its hard to learn anything useful from them because....how can you get anything good out of being mocked? Like seriously, what in the world do they think there going to accomplish doing that? Thats another blindness if they think there gonna actually accomplish anything by mocking.

 

[Jollybear]

Axe Elf was right, you are a black hole of nonsense. ALL you seem to do is throw out mindless nonsense and run away from debating anything.

No, i dont run away from ACTUAL debating. I just set rules that you must not mock me. DO THAT, THEN ill debate you.

You must agree with MY TERMS BEFORE debating. These terms are, NO MOCKING. No ad hominum attacks. Address every point, every counter argument and ANSWER every single one of my questions.

Those are my terms. Do you agree with these terms? Yes or no? If yes, then we may presume the debate. If no, then go find someone else to debate with. Someone that has more nerves to put up with being mocked constantly.

Because, look man, debating, researching takes ENOUGH work in itself, why should i have to do more work by putting up with being mocked through this process? Show some respect for the fact that im willing to do this tedious work with you in debating and going through the research, point by point.

If you cant do this, then your not a worthy debate opponent for me. You still have value as a fellow human being, but as fare as a debate opponent goes, your worth is nothing.

 

[Jollybear]

I can understand the occasional typo, but the misuse and misspelling of words throughout the body of one's work is a legitimate indicator of their general level of intellectual functioning.

The saturation of your posts with such errors doesn't look good for you when you are trying to insist that one nonsensical diatribe or another is actually rational.

First off, i type all this on my phone. That means its easyer to do typos. Thats also why i edit posts at times, its due to the phone typos.

Second, my body of work, spell wise, is actually not that bad.

Thirdly, if i make a few misspells, you apparently still know what i mean. Thats what matters, right? If you dont know, just ask.

Fourth, misspelling words dont mean your reasoning power on a subject is tampered.

 

[nPeace]

@Jollybear that's why you need to act wisely once you become aware of those who ridicule. Their aim is not to have a meaningful discussion. They just want to create a back and forth argument that's designed to make you look like them, so they can feel good in their arrogance - it's like an ego injection.
If we become like them it feeds their ego - it's sick but true.

So stay calm, and remember...
2 Timothy 4 New International Version (NIV)
1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: 2 Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage - with great patience and careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 5 But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.

So keep your cool while pointing out the fact that all they are really doing, is turning to modern day myths, while calling the truth myth - exchanging the truth for the lie, basically.
Romans 1:18-25;
Remember 1 Timothy 6
20 Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, 21 which some have professed and in so doing have departed from the faith.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope, nope, nope. You're not allowed to blather your way out of the corner you painted yourself into. At least @Jollybear tries to make points. Hopscotching around with this nonsense about why you don't need to make points because of false beliefs this and dishonest that is just a way to try to disguise that you were caught in an untenous position--demanding evidence to show that the wicked have a fate. Of course, the clear evidence of reason is that everyone has a fate--things happen to everyone, including the wicked.

You're not fooling anyone with pretending to not understand the question, or by trying to equate the evidence that everyone has a fate with evidence of a flat Earth.

Point at the sky all you like; no one is distracted from your failure here.

Just because you cannot ask a proper question does not make someone pointing bout your failure blather. This once again is an example of you failing to support your beliefs.

But since both you And I know that you are wrong let me help you. You mean to ask, but we're to afraid to ask what happened to a person after he died. If something somehow happened to his supposed soul, is that not what you meant to ask but we're too afraid to do so?

And now you really put your head in the noose. You claimed there I is evidence of this. What is this evidence? Once again you force the comparison between you and Flat Earthers, they, do not understand that concept either.

 

[Jollybear]

@Jollybear that's why you need to act wisely once you become aware of those who ridicule. Their aim is not to have a meaningful discussion. They just want to create a back and forth argument that's designed to make you look like them, so they can feel good in their arrogance - it's like an ego injection.
If we become like them it feeds their ego - it's sick but true.

So stay calm, and remember...
2 Timothy 4 New International Version (NIV)
1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: 2 Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage - with great patience and careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 5 But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.

So keep your cool while pointing out the fact that all they are really doing, is turning to modern day myths, while calling the truth myth - exchanging the truth for the lie, basically.
Romans 1:18-25;
Remember 1 Timothy 6
20 Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, 21 which some have professed and in so doing have departed from the faith.

Gotta get that GREAT patience in me.

 

[Vaderecta]

Good grief.....discipline does not mean beating anyone. An open handed smack on the behind is not child abuse. Failure to discipline is child abuse.

Blood is not sinful...it is sacred. That is why God forbids misusing it. It is indeed life-saving, but its Christ's blood that does that, not other people's. You'd be surprised how many doctors have apologized to us for all the bad press this issue has caused.

Spanking in most modern studies is not associated with with benefits to a child but rather negative ones.

Just because your 2000 year old book says spare the rod spoil the child doesn't mean that they had a clue what they were talking about. Blood is not magical it is a neccesary component of life and not only Trauma patients need it by so do those with sickle cell, burns, cancers and many other modern diseases. Some old book written by people with no understanding of modern science have convinced you that a car accident victim who may need 100 pints of blood alone is just not worth saving. Blood substitutes are not always available and even when they are they are often just not going to work. It depends on why you need a blood transfusion. Progress is being made in this field but its no where near there yet and giving blood saves lives and actually helps people.

All of this while hundreds of other religions read the same text and base their beliefs on the same scriptures but all came up with completely different answers often in direct conflict with each other.

On the plus side you can still drink coffee I guess.

 

[Vaderecta]

...come off more like the accidental effluvium of an unstable chimp with a Tomy's Tutor Typer.

Your entire post is essentially perjorative and you are not making an argument.

 

[lukethethird]

No, it is true - The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits.
The elevated trees survived, as there were not covered for very long.
The flood account is not disproved by persons wishing for it to be - no evidence. In just the same way the resurrection of the Christ is not disproved, because persons don't want to believe it.

Fiction just is what it is, it's not a matter of not wanting it to be true. Maybe it's just that you want it all to be true, so you believe it to be true.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Christians have some pretty strong beliefs concerning Adam and Eve and their role in getting mankind where we are today. How do you view Adam and Eve? As villains? Heros? Something in between? Did God know they were going to eat the forbidden fruit? What was His purpose in putting the tree there in the first place? What would have happened had Adam and Eve never eaten the forbidden fruit? What, if any, role would Jesus Christ have had in the world had the Fall never taken place?

These are just a few of many questions we could consider in talking about the events as recorded in Genesis and which have such a bearing on our lives today. All respectful discussion welcome.

Adam and Eve transgressed eating the fruit, meaning that they were very innocent but still sinned. Eating the fruit wasn't really the bad thing. What was bad would be that Lucifer would act on them and their children from then on to try to thwart God's plan. Lucifer wanted us to have the knowledge of good and evil because he just wanted us to automatically be made to be at the end of existence. He wanted us to be perfect without experiencing challenges. He attacks us in ways to try to convince God that making our own choices is not a wise thing for us to have. He attacks us to convince us of that as well.

 

[nPeace]

Spanking in most modern studies is not associated with with benefits to a child but rather negative ones.

Just because your 2000 year old book says spare the rod spoil the child doesn't mean that they had a clue what they were talking about. Blood is not magical it is a neccesary component of life and not only Trauma patients need it by so do those with sickle cell, burns, cancers and many other modern diseases. Some old book written by people with no understanding of modern science have convinced you that a car accident victim who may need 100 pints of blood alone is just not worth saving. Blood substitutes are not always available and even when they are they are often just not going to work. It depends on why you need a blood transfusion. Progress is being made in this field but its no where near there yet and giving blood saves lives and actually helps people.

All of this while hundreds of other religions read the same text and base their beliefs on the same scriptures but all came up with completely different answers often in direct conflict with each other.

On the plus side you can still drink coffee I guess.

Why do you make these conclusions. I find they don't support the facts, but rather they are repeated by persons giving personal opinions.

Blood transfusion in sickle cell disease
Blood transfusion should be aimed to increase tissue delivery of oxygen. Hb S is known to be a low affinity Hb and so delivers oxygen at a lower partial pressure of oxygen compared to Hb A. Even with adequate pre transfusion testing and precautions, blood transfusion is never totally safe and short or long term complications may occur. Blood transfusion in patients with sickle cell disease has only limited indications such as acute hemolytic, aplastic or sequestration crises.

Sickle cell anemia
Blood transfusions
In a red blood cell transfusion, red blood cells are removed from a supply of donated blood, then given intravenously to a person with sickle cell anemia.
Blood transfusions increase the number of normal red blood cells in circulation, helping to relieve anemia. In children with sickle cell anemia at high risk of stroke, regular blood transfusions can decrease the risk. Transfusions can also be used to treat other complications of sickle cell anemia, or they can be given to prevent complications.
Blood transfusions carry some risk, including infection and excess iron buildup in your body. Because excess iron can damage your heart, liver and other organs, people who undergo regular transfusions might need treatment to reduce iron levels.


Bloodless Medicine Proves Successful
Each year in the U.S., some 20 million blood transfusions are performed. But for a growing subset of patients, such procedures are not an option due to personal preferences, religious beliefs, or biological conditions such as advanced sickle cell disease with antibodies. In those circumstances, physicians can turn to a bloodless approach that avoids the need for transfusion. Remarkably, such approaches, which use a variety of clinical and laboratory methods, have been shown to not only reduce blood loss but also to speed recovery, minimize infection and reduce the length of hospital stays.

Major Surgery in A Jehovah Witness with Sickle Cell Disease: Case Presentation

Can a bloodless surgery program work in the trauma setting? Yes, as one hospital is proving. Read on to learn why this program is so successful.

 

[nPeace]

Fiction just is what it is, it's not a matter of not wanting it to be true. Maybe it's just that you want it all to be true, so you believe it to be true.

I haven't said maybe it is true, but going with your thinking, maybe it's true and you don't want it to be true, and the modern day fiction is more appealing to you.
However, we won't get anywhere with maybe, maybe not. I have a solid basis for believing the Biblical accounts to be true. Have you got a solid argument?

 

[MonkeyFire]

No.
Jesus will destroy Satan - Hebrews 2:14 B
Satan ends up in ' second death ' Revelation 21:8
So, ' second death ' is a fitting term for destruction.
Death as in the wicked will be ' destroyed forever ' as per Psalms 92:7
I find Adam could only sin on purpose, so neither Adam nor Satan/Lucifer can be saved.

Satan is not the same as Lucifer. Satan is the devil Lucifer is a angel. In fact, Satan is destruction itself and Jesus can withstand him without fighting.

 

[Axe Elf]

Your entire post is essentially perjorative and you are not making an argument.

That has been my point all along! Thank you for finally understanding it.

 

[Axe Elf]

Just because you cannot ask a proper question does not make someone pointing bout your failure blather. This once again is an example of you failing to support your beliefs. But since both you And I know that you are wrong let me help you.

More dancing around the question--but since you go on to address the question, I'll allow it in passing.

You mean to ask, but we're to afraid to ask what happened to a person after he died.

Afraid to ask? lol That IS what I asked. Let's review:

Well of course [the fate of the wicked] exists; the wicked have SOME fate--whether it is to die and cease to exist, to be destroyed in the lake of fire, to burn forever in hell, to go to heaven with everyone else, or to experience some other imagined or heretofore unimagined afterlife--but the fate of the wicked most certainly exists.

And what evidence do you have of this besides wishful thinking?

What a nonsensical question. To understand just how nonsensical it is, let me ask you instead--what will happen to the wicked, if not their fate?

My question of you was, "What will happen to the wicked?" Whatever your answer might be, that would be the fate of the wicked. Therefore the evidence that the fate of the wicked exists is not the wishful thinking of a theist, but rather the evidence of reason. Reason tells us that SOMETHING will happen to the wicked--the wicked have a fate, therefore, the fate of the wicked exists by evidence of reason.

 

[Subduction Zone]

More dancing around the question--but since you go on to address the question, I'll allow it in passing.



Afraid to ask? lol That IS what I asked. Let's review:





My question of you was, "What will happen to the wicked?" Whatever your answer might be, that would be the fate of the wicked. Therefore the evidence that the fate of the wicked exists is not the wishful thinking of a theist, but rather the evidence of reason. Reason tells us that SOMETHING will happen to the wicked--the wicked have a fate, therefore, the fate of the wicked exists by evidence of reason.

You should have said 'after you die' from the very beginning. Avoiding that tells us that you know deep down inside that your question is nonsensical. So far all evidence indicates that death is the end. Or to be clearer there is no reliable evidence for anything beyond life. The wicked die just like everyone else does. No special punishment no matter how much that you wish that was the case.

In your previous post it seems that you think there is evidence to the contrary. What do you have besides a book of myths/

 

[Axe Elf]

You should have said 'after you die' from the very beginning.

Let's review... again...

Well of course it exists; the wicked have SOME fate--whether it is to die and cease to exist, to be destroyed in the lake of fire, to burn forever in hell, to go to heaven with everyone else, or to experience some other imagined or heretofore unimagined afterlife--but the fate of the wicked most certainly exists.

Doesn't that sound like I'm talking about "after you die"? It seems clear that I was speaking in that context.

Avoiding that tells us that you know deep down inside that your question is nonsensical.

AVOIDING that? As we just saw, I was specifically CITING that in the context of my post--so the rest of your statement here is irrelevant.

So far all evidence indicates that death is the end. Or to be clearer there is no reliable evidence for anything beyond life. The wicked die just like everyone else does.

Then that is the fate of the wicked, in your opinion. They die, and they cease to exist. That was one of the options I gave in my original post. Let's review... again...

Well of course it exists; the wicked have SOME fate--whether it is to die and cease to exist, to be destroyed in the lake of fire, to burn forever in hell, to go to heaven with everyone else, or to experience some other imagined or heretofore unimagined afterlife--but the fate of the wicked most certainly exists.

No special punishment no matter how much that you wish that was the case.

Why would I wish that? I'm a Xian; I don't believe in "special punishment." Xians believe that some were created for salvation and some were created for destruction--but those that were created for destruction receive no special punishment. It's basically as you describe, they die and cease to exist. Xians just believe there is a resurrection for judgment in there, and then the wicked are destroyed, but it all amounts to the same thing--death is the end of their existence.

Xians do believe in a "special reward" for those who were created for salvation, however--eternal life in the presence of God, following the resurrection and judgment.

In any case, WHATEVER happens to the wicked after they die is the fate of the wicked. The evidence of reason tells us that the fate of the wicked exists (just not what their fate may be).

In your previous post it seems that you think there is evidence to the contrary. What do you have besides a book of myths/

I had described in a previous post the same thing that I just described about what Xians believe about the fate of the wicked, according to our book of myths (Revelation 20:10-15). It appears to be pretty much the same thing that you believe--that the wicked cease to exist after death.

So we agree that the fate of the wicked exists, by the evidence of reason, and we agree as to what that fate will be, according to our own understandings and opinions.

I guess we're done here?

 

[Vaderecta]

Why do you make these conclusions. I find they don't support the facts, but rather they are repeated by persons giving personal opinions.

Major Surgery in A Jehovah Witness with Sickle Cell Disease: Case Presentation

Can a bloodless surgery program work in the trauma setting? Yes, as one hospital is proving. Read on to learn why this program is so successful.

Bloodcenters is Vitalant and they want you to donate blood. It saves lives. Yes it has risks but sometimes getting a blood transfusion is the only thing that will save your life.

Sometimes you can use blood alternatives, but if you or someone you love needs a blood transfusion and there are no other options are you going to refuse because of the way some minority religious group interprets a few verses in a bible written thousands of years ago or trust your doctors and hospitals?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let's review... again...


Doesn't that sound like I'm talking about "after you die"? It seems clear that I was speaking in that context.

Yes, but of course theists tend to be dishonest when they trap themselves. I wanted a clear statement. Your constant running away from doing so only supported my claim.

AVOIDING that? As we just saw, I was specifically CITING that in the context of my post--so the rest of your statement here is irrelevant.

I made it clear that 'contact's was not good enough.

Then that is the fate of the wicked, in your opinion. They die, and they cease to exist. That was one of the options I gave in my original post. Let's review... again...

Let's not. Forget the excuses.

Why would I wish that? I'm a Xian; I don't believe in "special punishment." Xians believe that some were created for salvation and some were created for destruction--but those that were created for destruction receive no special punishment. It's basically as you describe, they die and cease to exist. Xians just believe there is a resurrection for judgment in there, and then the wicked are destroyed, but it all amounts to the same thing--death is the end of their existence.

Xians do believe in a "special reward" for those who were created for salvation, however--eternal life in the presence of God, following the resurrection and judgment.

In any case, WHATEVER happens to the wicked after they die is the fate of the wicked. The evidence of reason tells us that the fate of the wicked exists (just not what their fate may be).



I had described in a previous post the same thing that I just described about what Xians believe about the fate of the wicked, according to our book of myths (Revelation 20:10-15). It appears to be pretty much the same thing that you believe--that the wicked cease to exist after death.

So we agree that the fate of the wicked exists, by the evidence of reason, and we agree as to what that fate will be, according to our own understandings and opinions.

I guess we're done here?

No, no, no. Of course you believe in special punishment and reward. You are contradicting yourself again. You said and immediately forgot that you are a Christian.