You Were Inside Heaven, Because Of Your Parents.. You Kicked Out

[Camatose]

As a person who believes in logic I found the story of Adam and Eve is fairly unbelievable... Like I said we were in heaven, because of Adam and Eve we're no longer in heaven anymore.. So anyone who said God gave us the free will, according to this story this is irrationality, how? because God created this world for a purpose to keep us inside it and it was absolutely without doubt his plan for us to be here. Of course, he planned everything as well as you know, you have no free will at all, you didn't choice your race, skin color, nationality, your parents etc... The debate here about God's justice for the mankind. How comes for God to punish the entire human race just because their parents were sinner ? What if you're a criminal, there's a huge possibility for your children to be criminals like you.. nevertheless, if they imprisoned you, there's a huge hope that your children will not be criminals. For God it was his sake that's why he meant for you to inherit your parents sins.Unnecessarily to believe Adam's story and his wife to believe in God... that's true, but in most Abrahamic religions this story was mentioned in their holy books Torah, Bible, Qur'an. Now some of you might say, God gave them the free will to eat from tree of life, but Satan cheated on them. God created Satan for a purpose too, and there's nothing dropped out of his plan, no. As we know Satan changed himself to a snake and he cheated them, if that's true this is injustice either! for a simple reason God created Satan as a tricky creature, therefore Adam and Eve cannot figure out at that time who is Satan ?, from that logic I understand Satan has open access to heaven !
Discussion: you were inside heaven, because of your Parents.. you Kicked Out, this is injustice..If your parents were bad it's not a condition their children would be bad. God wanted us to be sinner as he planned.

 

[Camatose]

No responses within 32 views !

 

[Kalidas]

To me the idea of being born a "sinner" is silly. Babies have not murdered, stolen, raped, lied etc etc. Further more the idea of "good" and "evil" is a man made concept so that we may live together in a more harmonious (we hope but rarely succeed in even this) way. Good and evil are just ways to decide whether a particular action is "okay" in a society. I am a pandeist I believe the universe and God are the one in the same. As such all things good and bad are equally God. But that is my jumble opinion. Referring to your question? (You didn't actually ask a question) even what I WAS a Christian the idea of sin, hell, heaven, and free will elduded me. The bible says we have choice an yet also says God creates everything and know everything. Er go God knew of the first sin and still allowed it to occur. This is not free will but merely damnation at the start. I doubt God damns anything yet alone everyone.

 

[Camatose]

To me the idea of being born a "sinner" is silly. Babies have not murdered, stolen, raped, lied etc etc. Further more the idea of "good" and "evil" is a man made concept so that we may live together in a more harmonious (we hope but rarely succeed in even this) way. Good and evil are just ways to decide whether a particular action is "okay" in a society. I am a pandeist I believe the universe and God are the one in the same. As such all things good and bad are equally God. But that is my jumble opinion. Referring to your question? (You didn't actually ask a question) even what I WAS a Christian the idea of sin, hell, heaven, and free will elduded me. The bible says we have choice an yet also says God creates everything and know everything. Er go God knew of the first sin and still allowed it to occur. This is not free will but merely damnation at the start. I doubt God damns anything yet alone everyone.

Exactly, The religious theory of the natural world ("It's this way because a god decided to make it this way") does not explain anything."Richard Stallman".
Thanks for you reply...

 

[Camatose]

Most people ignore my topic, remember this is not a challenge nor a topic against your faith. It seems the religious theory is very complex for the believer, but whenever you free your mind to give and to receive, there you start.

 

[Camatose]

Up

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Given the thread has been up for a single day so many bumps seem perhaps uncalled for.

The concept of an omniscient god and the potential for conflict with the concept of free will is relatively well developed on this forum in a number of threads (ill leave it to you to look for them, there are just so many). However the two are not of necessity directly contradictory provided there was no causation nor fine tunnig based on achieving desired outcomes resulting from actions by those entities who were to be given free will (which by the way in the later case would still not be a direct contradiction, but would instead result in a rather absurd parallel in which only the reality in which the desired outcomes of free will would occur would be the existence to be created).

In terms of inherited sin, I think the entire thing is a crock. It was intended to show why people do bad things when we were supposedly made by something perfect and thus why we need to obey the religion's decrees, because no matter how well we try to be, we are all stained and unworthy, horribly deformed long before we were conceived - and our only hope to get better is if god makes us better, so start praying now and follow our rules.

What is more interesting about the story of creation in terms of the story of eden IMO is while adam and eve knew they were disobeying god by eating the fruit, did they know that disobeying god was a bad thing or that they should not do so BEFORE they ate the fruit?

 

[Camatose]

Given the thread has been up for a single day so many bumps seem perhaps uncalled for.

The concept of an omniscient god and the potential for conflict with the concept of free will is relatively well developed on this forum in a number of threads (ill leave it to you to look for them, there are just so many). However the two are not of necessity directly contradictory provided there was no causation nor fine tunnig based on achieving desired outcomes resulting from actions by those entities who were to be given free will (which by the way in the later case would still not be a direct contradiction, but would instead result in a rather absurd parallel in which only the reality in which the desired outcomes of free will would occur would be the existence to be created).

In terms of inherited sin, I think the entire thing is a crock. It was intended to show why people do bad things when we were supposedly made by something perfect and thus why we need to obey the religion's decrees, because no matter how well we try to be, we are all stained and unworthy, horribly deformed long before we were conceived - and our only hope to get better is if god makes us better, so start praying now and follow our rules.

What is more interesting about the story of creation in terms of the story of eden IMO is while adam and eve knew they were disobeying god by eating the fruit, did they know that disobeying god was a bad thing or that they should not do so BEFORE they ate the fruit?

we are all stained and unworthy, horribly deformed long before we were conceived - and our only hope to get better is if god makes us better, so start praying now and follow our rules.

If so depending on what you said, we're unworthy, horribly deformed.... then the creator made us horrible creatures in this way. Did you ask me to pray ?... You talk about your rules ? which I don't understand what do you mean by our rules ? if you meant religions rules I'm sorry to tell you, you're contradict yourself after you asked this question Adam and Eva have no idea about what will happen if they disobeyed God. Therefore, tell me at least one thing to conflict my mind logic in my mind.. You're obviously mistaken if you believe in God just 'irrationality'. Please, don't mention me again and your replies.. my topic about God not me and I'm not asking somebody to teach me who is God or theology, it's not about 'me'. It's about God and theological concepts. If you negotiate religion and you know it's the truth, this will not make you weak believer, instead this promotes your religion beliefs and empower you to conflict the others.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

I am sorry I just do not understand the phrasing of your reply, so find a response difficult to construct.

The concept of original sin is used by some people to try to explain the current nature of man (our behavior and psychology in particular), which is no longer (according to most who believe in original sin) as god supposedly created us. The idea is basically to try to find a way of explaining why it is that we humans are 'flawed' and yet god being perfect should not have made us flawed, so 'obviously' (to their minds) it must be someone else's fault. Who's fault? Well it can't be the 'devil' because the devil can't be powerful enough to mess up god's perfect creation... no it must have been OUR fault (according to adherents)... we must have chosen to remove ourselves from god's graces... It is this horrible sort of self effacement and yes even flagellation that is so endemic in the mindset.

By rules I was referring to the rules of the particular dogma espoused by whoever is proposing the original sin or some inherent failing(s) of the human condition - because invariably they provide some way to 'get well' and all we have to do is do as they say:

They note behavior that so many of us find objectionable, then assert this is the result of some sort of spiritual disfiguration that we all supposedly have, based on some event that they assumed would be so old no one could disprove it, they then say what the outcomes of this horrible flaw will be - that we will be punished eternally... then they offer salvation from their proposed punishment, 'just do what we say'. That is the nature of original sin - a means by which to ensure that everyone needs 'salvation', a disease for which you need to seek a cure. It is a recruitment tool.

 

[Camatose]

I am sorry I just do not understand the phrasing of your reply, so find a response difficult to construct.

The concept of original sin is used by some people to try to explain the current nature of man (our behavior and psychology in particular), which is no longer (according to most who believe in original sin) as god supposedly created us. The idea is basically to try to find a way of explaining why it is that we humans are 'flawed' and yet god being perfect should not have made us flawed, so 'obviously' (to their minds) it must be someone else's fault. Who's fault? Well it can't be the 'devil' because the devil can't be powerful enough to mess up god's perfect creation... no it must have been OUR fault (according to adherents)... we must have chosen to remove ourselves from god's graces... It is this horrible sort of self effacement and yes even flagellation that is so endemic in the mindset.

By rules I was referring to the rules of the particular dogma espoused by whoever is proposing the original sin or some inherent failing(s) of the human condition - because invariably they provide some way to 'get well' and all we have to do is do as they say:

They note behavior that so many of us find objectionable, then assert this is the result of some sort of spiritual disfiguration that we all supposedly have, based on some event that they assumed would be so old no one could disprove it, they then say what the outcomes of this horrible flaw will be - that we will be punished eternally... then they offer salvation from their proposed punishment, 'just do what we say'. That is the nature of original sin - a means by which to ensure that everyone needs 'salvation', a disease for which you need to seek a cure. It is a recruitment tool.

You said it's the devil's fault, it's the our fault, none of them are right, It would be God's fault. You went far away from my topic which is specifically about Adam and Eve we're no talking about sins and weather the theory of being sinner is true or false. It's about Adam and Eve and weather if God cheated on them or not. Logically as I said there's a problem here they don't have a free will and you asked a very important question do they know if they disobeyed what will happen ? you're very out of the main idea, it's not about sins, they were in heaven.. so there's no sin and no sinner. The fact is they were kicked out because they ate from tree of life, but of course it wasn't their free will and even if it is their free will, human being normally they cannot take the right decision most of the time ! Let's suppose God kept the wisdom in their hearts which kind of wisdom is that ? Satan is a great hacker but where ? inside heaven ! so we cannot reject God wanted that for them, if God did not mean that and they do have the free will, then God created the earth for who ? I'm trying to make you understand what I mean by you were kicked out because of your parents.. Example: If my mother was a killer "just example", normally the police will arrest her not her child ! and look what God has done ? he arrested all the generations. What if they police arrested me and arrested my wife and my children and my children's children ! is that fair ? The only person who broke the law was my mother and I personally nor my family engaged in any suspicious activities, therefore we must be oppressed, regardless of what the crime is and how bad is it ! since we did not engage in that, we're all innocent. If I was instead of Adam and Eve, I wouldn't eat from that tree !. Even if they have the free will as we know from the religious theory Satan is clever enough to cheat the entire human race that's how God created him he turned himself to a sneak as you know, then how can they recognize if he's Satan or anything else ?... and that's what God wanted for them in his sake.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

I do not believe in God the devil or original sin. I am merely pointing out the nature of the argument used. Adherents generally begin with a set of underlying beliefs similar to:
-God is Perfect
-God created Humans
-Humans are Flawed
-Something created by a perfect existence should be without flaw

Since this causes a problem they look at other potential causes for our flaws - the major possibilities are 1. some supernatural agency which is opposed to god's efforts (such as some devil) or 2. us.

The problem with considering the first possibility is that it would seem to indicate that the devil had the power to undermine god's perfect creation, this is ideologically problematic given that the assumption is that god is perfect. The second option is therefore the one that they embrace (made easier once one remembers that they have already determined that we are flawed), thus the claim that we were the cause. How could this claim be expressed? By proposing a situation in which we assume some sort of liability at the same time as we obtain some significant flaw - this is the proposed original sin.

The sin component is fundamental for this discussion as it is this supposed departure from our alleged prior perfection which we associate with 'heaven' and the loss of this supposed perfection (i.e. when we supposedly obtained our current state) is when we 'departed from god and his graces'.

During the garden of eden episode, Humans did indeed have free will according to this model, it is simply that god knew how they would exercise that free will before they were ever presented with the option, and he would have known that the snake was there and was going to affect their decision, it would still however be free will. According to the story of adam and eve if you accept it (which I dont) no human but adam and eve were in the garden of eden (*I should note there are some accounts which dispute this*) thus only they were kicked from heaven.

Once again it returns to the teachings of 'original sin' to explain this - it is supposedly inherited, much like a genetic defect or disease. It is this condition however that we have no free will over; we inherit it. Adam and Eve had free will when they chose it for themselves, but that portion of free will was inhibited for their descendants because of their choice. Rather than considering free will as entirely individualized it centers on the ideal of free will as a gift given in common to humanity, that the choices of one might impact on the choices available to others... it is indeed free will though.

BTW

The snake is never referred to as satan (which just means opposition - not to god but to us) let alone Satan, nor in the Old Testament are the satans ever invested with any significant power, satan is not the lord of evil ruling hell as he is often portrayed in later years, no he is one of God's associates or lieutenants perhaps... friendly enough to stop by have a up of tea and make bets about how people might react if tortured enough and stick around for a few years while the torture is taking place to see how the bet turns out.

 

[Camatose]

I do not believe in God the devil or original sin. I am merely pointing out the nature of the argument used. Adherents generally begin with a set of underlying beliefs similar to:
-God is Perfect
-God created Humans
-Humans are Flawed
-Something created by a perfect existence should be without flaw

Since this causes a problem they look at other potential causes for our flaws - the major possibilities are 1. some supernatural agency which is opposed to god's efforts (such as some devil) or 2. us.

The problem with considering the first possibility is that it would seem to indicate that the devil had the power to undermine god's perfect creation, this is ideologically problematic given that the assumption is that god is perfect. The second option is therefore the one that they embrace (made easier once one remembers that they have already determined that we are flawed), thus the claim that we were the cause. How could this claim be expressed? By proposing a situation in which we assume some sort of liability at the same time as we obtain some significant flaw - this is the proposed original sin.

The sin component is fundamental for this discussion as it is this supposed departure from our alleged prior perfection which we associate with 'heaven' and the loss of this supposed perfection (i.e. when we supposedly obtained our current state) is when we 'departed from god and his graces'.

During the garden of eden episode, Humans did indeed have free will according to this model, it is simply that god knew how they would exercise that free will before they were ever presented with the option, and he would have known that the snake was there and was going to affect their decision, it would still however be free will. According to the story of adam and eve if you accept it (which I dont) no human but adam and eve were in the garden of eden (*I should note there are some accounts which dispute this*) thus only they were kicked from heaven.

Once again it returns to the teachings of 'original sin' to explain this - it is supposedly inherited, much like a genetic defect or disease. It is this condition however that we have no free will over; we inherit it. Adam and Eve had free will when they chose it for themselves, but that portion of free will was inhibited for their descendants because of their choice. Rather than considering free will as entirely individualized it centers on the ideal of free will as a gift given in common to humanity, that the choices of one might impact on the choices available to others... it is indeed free will though.

BTW

The snake is never referred to as Satan (which just means opposition - not to god but to us) let alone Satan, nor in the Old Testament are the Satan ever invested with any significant power, Satan is not the lord of evil ruling hell as he is often portrayed in later years, no he is one of God's associates or lieutenants perhaps... friendly enough to stop by have a up of tea and make bets about how people might react if tortured enough and stick around for a few years while the torture is taking place to see how the bet turns out.

Thanks ! you uncovered something very important ... now the viewers can read more information about this case. But I might disagree with you in some cases about that story. we have no free will based on evidence, Anyway thank you very much. There's no need for any explanation to define what happened you talk about things which is off the topic, it doesn't matter to link sins with this topic at all why ? because they were in heaven, there no sins. God never wanted you to be clean in flesh and soul that's why he created the tricky Satan. This is such a childish story, No.. seriously. God is not perfect at all. Just for an apple he condemned all the generations ? I gave a clear example for you. We don't have anything to do with flaws of God or humans ! So this is off the topic. And please stop rejecting that sneak because this is very tricky way for you to change the facts. Weather if there's a snake or not, God kicked them out to this world. That's what the Abrahamic religions say. It freaks me out... every time I give an evidence or a story from these religions, I find somebody saying noo I think, it shouldn't be like that, umm it was, they were. The The snake is never referred to as Satan bla bla bla just to hide the truth. Exaggerations not facts. I gave examples in almost every replay I posted, so please make things obvious to me, give logic examples from our life so I can believe it.

I do not believe in God the devil or original sin.

If you're a "Christian" you can't say that.

 

[Camatose]

I won, there's no God.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Well there are some types of christianity that believe that the story of adam and eve is literal, however there are some surprising ones that officially recognize it as metaphorical. Most surprising IMO is the Roman Catholic Church; what is interesting in their case is that while they have determined the story to be metaphorical they maintain the concept of original sin itself - not as a specific event perhaps but rather as a deformation of humanity resulting in the general conditions of humans which lead them to sins and other failings. The concept of original sin is so fundamentally important to christianity that even if one recognizes the flaws of adam and eve, there is still a rather profound need to accept some parallel to the 'original sin', not merely because it explains our 'imperfection' but because in christianity, one of the most important reasons given for why jesus needed to come as the son of god and die for us - was directly attributed to the need to redress in some manner, original sin. This is why even those christian groups that do not accept a literal interpretation of that the garden of eden story generally do accept the concept of original sin.

That is why it is not off topic, the second most important component of the garden of eden story (the first being god's creation of everything) is original sin - because it is this which is the fundamental underpinnings of the faith and the reason we are supposedly imperfect - without original sin we were perfect we would still be in heaven (without failing every single person would be in heaven, because there would be no sin in life, because our sins occur as a result of the failings we have as people which we only have as a result of the original sin - moreover the statement by god that we would certainly die would not apply, we would live eternally). Original sin is the crux of the entire issue.

Without Original Sin = Perfect Us; immortal; never sins; is in heaven
With Original Sin = Imperfect Us; mortal; is inclined to sin; is not in heaven (and possibly not able to go to heaven)

This is supposedly a result of our forebears choice - the difference is however that WE had no choice in it and it is this which leads us to be inclined towards sin, thus we have no choice in being inclined towards sin (we do however have the choice to refrain from sinning, but that is not the same) and supposedly god has the capacity to fix this imperfection - which we have through no fault of our own, which we cannot use our free will to get rid of and which has the distinct possibility of leading us to sin and thus to never reach heaven. Even if god is not responsible for the original sin itself (and the capacity to argue some significant culpability is indeed upon him), he is however intentionally condoning the infliction of a wrong against all subsequent humans, who even if they have inherited flaws have not inherited culpability.

Your focus on the snake and whether or not it is satan or attempting to focus on whether or not god knew what they were going to do (and I would suggest he did) - and indeed his choice in placing the tree there to begin with etc is immaterial when considering the effect on all of humanity as opposed to simply on culpability of adam and eve themselves. The far more pressing issue is that of inherited flaw as opposed to inherited culpability; it could be argued that some flaw might have been passed on, it is however ludicrous to suggest that we have somehow inherited culpability for something that occurred before we even existed, let alone had exercised agency in or exerted our 'free will'.

 

[sojourner]

If you're a "Christian" you can't say that.

I'm a Christian. I don't believe in "original sin."
There. I said it.

I won, there's no God.

Belief in the existence or non-existence of God isn't a contest to be won or lost. Nor is it a fact to be proven.

 

[Camatose]

I'm a Christian. I don't believe in "original sin."
There. I said it.

Belief in the existence or non-existence of God isn't a contest to be won or lost. Nor is it a fact to be proven.

I'm a Christian. I don't believe in "original sin."
There. I said it.
Then you must reject Jesus and the salvation.
Belief in the existence or non-existence of God isn't a contest to be won or lost. Nor is it a fact to be proven.

You need to understand what I meant by that.

 

[Camatose]

I'm a Christian. I don't believe in "original sin."
There. I said it.

Belief in the existence or non-existence of God isn't a contest to be won or lost. Nor is it a fact to be proven.

Then you must reject Jesus and salvation.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Depends on what you mean by salvation and the underlying nature of humanity.

Your view of what constitutes belief in Jesus and Salvation apparently does not include at least 1.2 billion of those who call themselves christian (the Roman Catholic church and some other denominations)

 

[Camatose]

Depends on what you mean by salvation and the underlying nature of humanity.

Your view of what constitutes belief in Jesus and Salvation apparently does not include at least 1.2 billion of those who call themselves christian (the Roman Catholic church and some other denominations)

If there's no original sin then why do we need Jesus ?

 

[sojourner]

You need to understand what I meant by that.

You need to be more clear and concise in your writing.