I never really read the bible
but if this story is something like the story of Noah in the bible I would be pretty offended that our creator is so cruel and vingative I mean come on
shareI would be pretty offended that our creator is so cruel and vingative
I'm assuming you mean "vindictive." As portrayed in Christian theology which, excepting the NT, is essentially Jewish theology and by cultural relationship Islamic as well, this deity is nothing BUT cruel and vindictive...with some spin doctoring along the way, of course. Lots of cant about how loving it is. Its words and deeds, however, are another matter.
The book begins with it lying to its first two human creations about the terms of their lives in paradise then, after they quite understandably get it wrong, this deity condemns them to death after filling their lives with pain and suffering. What's more, it also condemns their innocent unborn children to the same fate until the end of time.
Naturally things go from bad to worse.
This deity repeatedly calls for its followers to commit genocide while itself pouring down death and destruction on every side, with this flood story being only one notable example. Reading the book, you get a clear idea of why these ISIS massacres are happening today. They're very much in line with the teachings of the OT, which are echoed pretty closely in the Koran.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
Where to begin here.....first off, God did not lie to Adam and Eve, whom by the way were God's ONLY two human creations (after Adam and Eve, babies were BORN). God clearly told Adam in the second chapter of Genesis “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”
Here they are in a beautiful garden, not having to hunt or farm for food, eternal life, etc... and Satan comes along, tempts Eve, she then causes Adam to sin, and then they get kicked out of paradise on Earth. God straight up told them what would happen but they disobeyed anyway. No one lied to them. They chose to disobey of their own volition.
I'm not sure what you mean about "condemns their innocent unborn children". But consider this, when God sent the Flood he could have chosen to wipe out ALL mankind but he saved Noah and his family. When God led Israel out of Egypt he gave them laws which included laws against witchcraft, sorcery, sexual immorality, etc. When they came into the land that God promised to Abraham the people already living there would extremely wicked. This is verified in the book of Deuteronomy: "It is not for your righteousness or for the uprightness of your heart that you are going to possess their land, but it is because of the wickedness of these nations that the LORD your God is driving them out before you, in order to confirm the oath which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" (Deuteronomy 9:5) and "You shall not behave thus toward the LORD your God, for every abominable act which the LORD hates they have done for their gods; for they even burn their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods" (Deuteronomy 12:31) So the idea that God destroyed "innocent" people is totally false.
God did not lie to Adam and Eve
Yeah, it did. It told Adam and Eve they'd die instantly from eating the fruit. They didn't. This was also a lie in that it implied the only thing bad about eating the fruit was that it was poison. So, thirdly, it was a lie of omission in that it did NOT let them know the real horrific penalty.
I'm not sure what you mean about "condemns their innocent unborn children".
Erm...seriously? All their descendants suffered the same fate: to live brief painful lives then die.
when God sent the Flood he could have chosen to wipe out ALL mankind but he saved Noah and his family
And this is a good thing...how?
So the idea that God destroyed "innocent" people is totally false.
So the women, children, and livestock were also evil who were killed in the numerous genocidal massacres ordered by this deity of yours? Such a way of thinking is exactly that of ISIS.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
I'm confused, in which version of the Bible does it say that they would die instantly please? Obviously they did not instantly die because they were kicked out of Eden and went on to have children. But yes, eventually they died but not from eating the forbidden fruit. The Bible is also pretty clear on the fact that they did not lead brief lives. If you read Genesis 5 it clearly states that people were living almost to be almost to 1000 years old!
Adam and Eve had it made. They didn't have to work, they didn't have to farm for food, they didn't have to worry about anything, everything for them was provided. They had one rule to follow and they willfully disobeyed. It's the same when you have kids, there has to be discipline. I don't believe in making threats, if I tell you specifically how you're going to be punished if you violate Mom's rules, then you're getting punished. In this case, God told them exactly what would happen and it did.
When I read the phrase "condemns innocent unborn children" it instantly makes me think of abortion and I am very Pro-Life. Let's move on.
These alleged "innocent people" weren't as innocent as you might think. They were demon worshipers who offered their own children as a sacrifice to Baal. They knew the rules too but chose to disobey. They were immoral, they probably had sexual rituals involving children since they seemed to have no problem throwing their children into the fire as human sacrifices. They raised thechildren they didn't kill up in this religion. If God had permitted them to live they would have eaten through humanity like a cancer.
In Genisis 6 it says "Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God. 10 Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth.
11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth". He saved Noah and his family. When he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah God said he would spare the city if ten righteous people could be found which of course there weren't.
I don't see any similarity to Muslim extremists, they would just kill everybody.
in which version of the Bible does it say that they would die instantly
He told him, “You may eat the fruit of any tree in the garden, 17 except the tree that gives knowledge of what is good and what is bad. You must not eat the fruit of that tree; if you do, you will die the same day.”The Bible is also pretty clear on the fact that they did not lead brief lives.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis++2&version=GNT
Pure hair splitting. 1,000 years is nothing in comparison with eternal life.
you're going to be punished if you violate Mom's rules, then you're getting punished
These threats have no bite. Rather, they only betray your own underlying pathology. I pity you this sad hatred. How completely you've missed the only worthwhile message underlying the theology you claim to embrace. Hint: such poisonous hatred is no part of it.
it instantly makes me think of abortion
So you want us to believe there wasn't a single woman who was pregnant at the time of this mythical flood in which you believe? I won't ask if you're serious about this insane notion, because it's obvious that you are.
They were demon worshipers who offered their own children as a sacrifice to Baal.
And yet this deity you profess to worship condemned these innocent children based solely on what their parents did? Has your belief system so completely divorced you from basic human morality that you can rationalize this atrocity as goodness? Can you truly doubt why I reject this decadent belief system you profess? (Hint: since your dogma seems to completely separate you from reality, the answer to that question is obviously rhetorical.)
I don't see any similarity to Muslim extremists
This is merely another proof that you have no clue about your own theology. Your deity exhorts its followers to massacre non-believers exactly as the assassins of ISIS believe their deity demands the same. If you can't figure this out for yourself, you are no different from those ISIS murderers.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere. share
Good afternoon.
In response to the question as to whether God lied to Adam found in Genesis 2:17 you state that they should have died instantly after eating the fruit they were forbidden to eat. This verse can be taken in a different light if you take this into consideration: man was created with innocence, placed into a perfect environment, given ONE rule and was warned of the consequences of disobeying. The "death" in this case pertains to the loss of eternal life by their choice to disobey God. With their disobedience they brought sin into the world and all the wars and violence happening to this day.
I agree that 1000 years is nothing compared to eternal life. Too bad that Adam and Eve made the choice to disobey God and lose it. You're not really clear though about disciplining my kids though. And what do you mean my having sad hatred? About what? You're the one who sounds like you have some hatred going on. Are you saying that children should be allowed to do whatever they want? Every action has a consequence and I always followed through with what I said. You must not have children or you would understand.
In Genesis 6 it states: "5 The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6 The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” This included children/babies. You want to talk about ISIS? People tend to assume that children are innocent, even if their parents are doing bad things. The assumption is unfounded. For example, Muslim children are officially taught in grammar school to hate their Jewish neighbors. They are so well indoctrinated that some of them give up their lives in suicide bombings as children. Corruption literally does breed corruption, which is why God did not want his people tainted by the other corrupt cultures of the Middle East. Now I know you're saying there must have been some innocent people in those cities. There actually is an example of a time when God was asked if He would destroy the innocent along with the wicked. Prior to destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham asked God if He would destroy the righteous along with the wicked and God replied that He would spare the entire city for 50 righteous people. The number got down to 10 people and God said for 10 innocent people he would spare the entire city. He did save the four righteous people in the city though because 10 couldn't be found.
The "death" in this case pertains to the loss of eternal life by their choice to disobey God.
But that isn’t what their deity tells them. Saying they will die “right away” is a lie both of omission and misdirection. First it implies it’s only the poisonous fruit that’s the threat, and second it denies them the real reason they’d die.
You're the one who sounds like you have some hatred going on.
I find your theology hopelessly flawed, and clearly point out the reasons why. Where is the “hatred” in this? Really, you should spare yourself the embarrassment of trotting out this well poisoning trick. It only makes your arguments all the weaker.
You're not really clear though about disciplining my kids though.
Comparing human parenting to the parenting of an all-powerful all-knowing entity is a completely false analogy. Of course, it’s one believers frequently trot out to defend this indefensible episode in their theology. However, it still fails.
Every action has a consequence and I always followed through with what I said.
So, in order to make your children behave, you’re prepared to lie to them, then starve them to death when they disobey? Meanwhile, your deity’s solution to misbehavior proves to be a colossal failure. Why would anyone but the most gullible believe such an entity could be described as all-wise? This is the best it can manage???
This included children/babies.
Sorry, but this sounds exactly like what ISIS is saying to its children, exactly the mindset that leads to mass atrocities. Rationalizing mass killing for any reason whatever is not only morally reprehensible but socially lethal. It’s repugnant when ISIS does it, when communists do it, when white supremacists do it, and when polite Christians do it. A deity that would do it would be a monster.
Good thing there’s not one iota of evidence deity exists.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
I checked again with the Bible version I personally use which is the NIV. This is the verse I believe I originally used: "And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” This version doesn't have anyone dying instantly. The secondary version I use is the King James Version and the same verse from there is basically the same as the NIV: "16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Again there is no instant death lie occurring. I see you chose the Good News Translation which is one I am not at all familiar and your version is clearly different from mine. Based on what I've read in a version I use most of the time, I stand by my original statement.
The rest of what you wrote is a bit incoherent. I stand by my statement that you have an anger thing going on. Like you, I clearly showed you how I find YOUR theology hopelessly flawed as well. The poisoning/starving comment neither are in my Bibles. The two versions I mentioned are the ones I've used most of my life and neither includes God lying or starving anyone. I hardly think I'm gullible but then again, you're entitled to this opinion as well. I don't have to agree with it.
What is this "well poisoning" statement you seem to throw out a lot? Does it coincide somehow with the apple from the Tree of Life?? Sorry I don't understand.
15 Then the Lord God placed the man in the Garden of Eden to cultivate it and guard it. 16 He told him, “You may eat the fruit of any tree in the garden, 17 except the tree that gives knowledge of what is good and what is bad. You must not eat the fruit of that tree; if you do, you will die the same day.”The Hebrew word may be translated differently, but its precise meaning is "immediately," or "at that very moment."
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=GNT
Based on what I've read in a version I use most of the time, I stand by my original statement.
And you'd still be wrong.
I stand by my statement that you have an anger thing going on.
Yet you are unable to provide any proof beyond the empty claim itself. You, however, do seem angry that your beliefs are so effectively challenged.
I find YOUR theology hopelessly flawed as well
And what theology would that be?
The two versions I mentioned are the ones I've used most of my life and neither includes God lying or starving anyone.
See above, and:
22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”This second quotation is from your favored text. Starving someone means withholding from them the food that keeps them alive. Even your preferred version leaves no doubt that is precisely the punishment this deity metes out.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis+3&version=NIV
What is this "well poisoning" statement you seem to throw out a lot?
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/141-poisoning-the-well
With the entire Internet's resources at your fingertips, you couldn't find this yourself? I did it in a single search. You accuse me of being "angry." Therefore anything I say must be a result of that anger thus it must be wrong.
I find theists especially are very fond of employing exactly this childish fallacy and in this way. "You don't believe because you're angry." With your deity of some church or some church people is often added to the sentence in an attempt to give it more credibility. Even giving you the benefit of the doubt by accepting you really believe this claim of yours, at the very best it would mean you're mistaking a solid argument for anger.
One doesn't have to be angry to reject Christian theology. They just have to think it through without having scales on their eyes.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere. share
Yes dear, I read it the first three times you typed. I could retype mine as well. Nor do I think you are now suddenly an expert in ancient Hebrew and are qualified to translate the Bible on your own. There are other references to Adam and Eve that back up my claim that there was no deceit by God: Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" , Dt.30:15 "15“See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity", Titus 3:5-6 "5 He saved us, but not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,7 so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life" and James 1:15 "15 Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death".
Now as for the starving thing which you copied/pasted from the NIV: do you realize it means if you eat from the tree of life you will live forever, something Adam and Eve gave up when they disobeyed God. They lost the gift of eternal life, they were going to die. Their mouths weren't removed nor did God lock them up til they died. It means they were no longer going to just pick some fruit and eat it. They had to work to gather food and now they could hunt as God permitted the eating of meat. If you don't have eternal life, then you will die. My translation of the Bible, which is supposed to be the most accurate to date (your version was first introduced in 1976) says nothing about instant death. Sorry I still disagree.
The well poisoning statement: yes I use the internet all the time for research. However I wanted YOU to define as YOU see it. You chose to give me a link, no biggie. It's not really that important.
Bottom line is that this entire topic of Adam and Eve is subjective. You believe one thing, I believe another. To me, it's not an argument. It's a message board where everything except movies are discussed. I didn't say you were angry because you didn't believe in God. I thought you were angry because that's how YOU come across because I do believe and you want to change that. Don't get it twisted.
I read it the first three times you typed
I have no idea what you’re talking about. Please cite what and which “3 times” I’ve typed something. Otherwise, we must take this as another example of well poisoning.
Nor do I think you are now suddenly an expert in ancient Hebrew and are qualified to translate the Bible on your own.
Your opinion in this matter is irrelevant. Refute the translation example I’ve cited, or again your claim is moot. Quotes from other irrelevant passages of your theology mean nothing. Provide something of substance to refute the clear proof that your deity lied in the passage you’ve been presented. Otherwise, you cede the point.
do you realize it means if you eat from the tree of life you will live forever, something Adam and Eve gave up when they disobeyed God.
They did not “give it up.” It was denied them by this deity as part of their punishment, which is made crystal clear in that quotation. This deity of yours deliberately starved them to death. Unless you can provide evidence to the contrary, you again cede the point.
your version was first introduced in 1976
Again, irrelevant.
I wanted YOU to define as YOU see it.
I did.
You accuse me of being "angry." Therefore anything I say must be a result of that anger thus it must be wrong.this entire topic of Adam and Eve is subjective
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1959490/board/inline/244190271
Only if you refuse to read the words exactly as they are put before you.
I thought you were angry because that's how YOU come across
Yet again, you provide no evidence of any reason you thought this. So it can only be taken for an example of well poisoning.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere. share
I was referring to the verse from your version of scripture, you repeated it three times:
"15 Then the Lord God placed the man in the Garden of Eden to cultivate it and guard it. 16 He told him, “You may eat the fruit of any tree in the garden, 17 except the tree that gives knowledge of what is good and what is bad. You must not eat the fruit of that tree; if you do, you will die the same day.”
Adam and Eve both sinned when they disobeyed God:
"11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”
12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”
13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”
God's punishment for disobeying:
" 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life." (not instant death)
Adam and Eve's sin brought corruption into the world:
" The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
God's punishment:
"11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth.
17 I am going to bring flood waters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish."
I still don't understand at all about your statement where you said God deliberately starved them to death? Adam lived over 900 years and the Bible says then he died. Please show me the verse with the starvation.
On the subject of being subjective, your statement would go both ways especially since the quote you submitted is worded differently from the one I did:
" 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”
If you continue reading Genesis you see this just doesn't happen?
you repeated it three times
I repeated it twice, the second time to highlight the section you willfully ignore. The other time was in a translation that contradicts it (or at least is more accurate). This is called being thorough. You should try it.
I still don't understand at all about your statement where you said God deliberately starved them to death?
Possibly because you can't face the truth of it. Your deity explicitly tells his minions to deny A&E the tree of life by whose food they would life forever and not die. This is the food. Without it they die by being starved of food which would otherwise keep them alive. Where is there the least thing to misunderstand in this?
If you continue reading Genesis you see this just doesn't happen?
My point exactly. Therefore, your deity lied.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
I think you repeat over and over to attempt to make your point, which in my case doesn't work. You haven't convinced me, you just repeat YOUR interpretation of what you've read. Also, you are the only atheist I've ever met who's presented this asinine argument. But hey, if that's what you want to believe that's your business. Your efforts to evangelize me to your way of thinking though have failed again, sorry.
The Lord led me to this passage this morning from the book of Titus:
"3 Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, 2 to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and always to be gentle toward everyone.
3 At one time we too were foolish, disobedient, deceived and enslaved by all kinds of passions and pleasures. We lived in malice and envy, being hated and hating one another. 4 But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. 8 This is a trustworthy saying. And I want you to stress these things, so that those who have trusted in God may be careful to devote themselves to doing what is good. These things are excellent and profitable for everyone.
9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. 10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. 11 You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned."
Have a nice day!
I think you repeat over and over to attempt to make your point
Ah. So you're just employing the poisoning the well fallacy again. Got it.
You haven't convinced me
I'm unconcerned with convincing you. The religious aren't reasonable so it's fruitless to reason with them. I'm demonstrating to you why your theology is unconvincing to me.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
Opinions vary. 😃
shareFacts do not.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
Too bad you don't have them. 😨
shareToo bad you don't have them.
And what "facts" have you? A ephemeral tissue of fantasy stories written by primitive desert dwellers who had no clue about the natural sciences? The fantasies of Greeks living in a pre-technological age over 2000 years ago? The wish fulfillments of folks who believed the world was flat, and who had no clue about celestial mechanics, gravity,evolution, or even the simplest grasp of bacteria?
You call these whispy delusions "fact," when the truth is they're nothing more than airy fantasies cooked up by the ignorant, the weak, and the terminally needy to rationalize the physics they had no possible clue of grasping. While I sympathize with their inevitable ignorance, I cannot possibly commit myself to their futile delusions. Nor can I credit your own retrograde attempts to rationalize away their misconceptions. I live in the 21st century, not like you, in the 12th.
Your theology is a joke. No wonder more and more people reject it every day.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
Amen :)
share “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”
This has already been pointed out, but it needs emphasizing, and if you are sincere, it should be addressed seriously.
This certainly sounds like a warning, not a command, no matter which translation you use.
So how can Adam and Eve then be punished for disobedience?
It appears the snake was right...god lied...or at least was extremely deceptive...the fruit of that tree was NOT poison...and they lost eternal life not from eating of that fruit, but because the other fruit became unavailable (was withheld from them).
Why didn't god just make himself plain...don't eat of that tree because I don't want you to...instead of being coy and cryptic...as usual?
And don't use that old cop out when you can't answer a question...if your goal is to bring truth, then you also must be open to it...otherwise you just wish to preach and convert and hold little respect for those you want to indoctrinate.
And that bespeaks of arrogance and pride...now which of the deadly sins is that?
“Your head is on the block and you worry about your whiskers?”
People who take biblical stories, especially in the OT, literally, are certainly in need of help.
Any human being who decides to completely suspend reality in order to believe any written or spoken word should be ignored and derided.
Thankfully more and more of our intelligent species realise how religion became the GREAT HOAX of humanity.
And yes, the origins of religion CAN be explained clearly enough for even the most simple of people.
"when you eat of it"..."for in the day"...
Both of these quotations from your preferred versions certainly strongly imply immediacy.
And they certainly do not suggest "a thousand years hence'!
It takes strenuous contortions to get anywhere near such an interpretation.
But such is the life of an apologist...god, in his holy books, never means what he is actually saying...sigh.
Even if you want to ignore this there are other glaring problems.
You say Adam and Eve committed the grievous sin of disobedience and so lost eternal life on earth.
So...
1. Would this mean they would never go to heaven, spending all of eternity on earth?
2. Does this then mean that the earth is better than heaven, since that is what they lost?
3. If they had not sinned, then presumably none of us, no other human being, would have been born...so shouldn't we be supremely grateful to them?
4. Back to this "eternity on earth." Wouldn't it get extremely boring after only a few years? Speaking of which, what about in heaven? What does one do for kicks up there? I hope it is not endless reruns of Leave it to Beaver and Happy Days..
5. You never answered my question from before...If god regretted creating man, then that means god is not perfect...so why do his followers insist otherwise?...and please, no gymnastics, just reply with an answer plain and simple...
6. How can god....oh, never mind, we'll leave it with the above for now...
7. Not a question but an admonition. An atheist has no "theology". Period. There is no equivalence, moral or otherwise. Nice try, but it taints..or poisons..the otherwise discernible sincerity on your part. I hope you are better than that...
“Your head is on the block and you worry about your whiskers?”
To address the issue of Adam and Eve dying the same day that they eat the forbidden fruit: this is a good example of needing to cross-reference the bible in order to correctly interpret its meaning. In this case, 2 Peter 3:8 gives insight: "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." As 1000 years are like a day to the Lord, Adam and Eve dying in less than 1000 years is like them dying that same day.
sharethis is a good example of needing to cross-reference the bible in order to correctly interpret its meaning
I get what your theology means because I've read it carefully. What you don't seem to get is that yours is purely an equivocation which does not address the underlying issue. Your deity does not tell A&E the truth in that it makes it seem as if death would be caused strictly by some poison in the fruit itself. It does not tell them the real truth, which is that they'd die because their deity kills them by starving them to death. Meanwhile, a day is a day whatever time "seems like." A day means 24 hours, period, and there is not one iota of proof that it has meant anything else since the beginning of human life.
This is only the iceberg's tip of the host of contradictions, confusions, impossibilities, and ugly moral flaws in this theology, a belief system so peppered with logical holes that no rational thinking person would ever fall for any of it, or at least one who hasn't been indoctrinated from earliest youth in these fantasies.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
The meaning in genesis is "spiritual death" not physical death, meaning they will become mortal. I have no idea why this IMBD forum of the movie Noah is about the bible/religion and not about the movie in itself, you atheists are more obsessed with religion than theists are.
shareI really like your post, Cidlo.
I have no idea why this IMBD forum of the movie Noah is about the bible/religion and not about the movie in itself, you atheists are more obsessed with religion than theists are.Thank you for mentioning it. Anybody care to discuss the movie?
share
Yes. I wish to comment on the movie.
The original script, although a lot of nonsense, lends itself to a vibrant and colorful plot.
The Brothers Grimm could not have done better with this fairy story.
The meaning in genesis is "spiritual death" not physical death
1. That's merely an apologist interpretation nowhere supported in the text itself, but rather utterly contradicted by that text when the deity figure forbids them the tree of life.
2. Obviously they don't die spiritually, but remain in full communication with that deity.
3. The wonder is that you can still believe this feeble apology in any way acquits this deity of being a monster.
you atheists are more obsessed with religion than theists are
Kind of the way blacks are obsessed with the KKK.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.”
God regrets that he made the human race...in other words, he made a mistake!
So, either he is lying here, and he didn't make a mistake or god is not perfect and his christian followers refuse to believe his own words.
Which is it?
“Your head is on the block and you worry about your whiskers?”
You should know that to God, a 1000 years is like a day. So they did on the same day to him cause they lived almost a 1000 years. Read the Bible.
shareto God, a 1000 years is like a day.
Irrelevant. Adam and Eve weren't deities. Days were for them what they are taken to be for all mortal creatures, and the definition of a day is clearly established in Genesis.
So they did on the same day to him cause they lived almost a 1000 years.
A year is 365 days. So obviously they didn't die on the same day.
Read the Bible.
I have. Just without the mote in my eye which has swollen to a plank in yours.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
You should know that to God, a 1000 years is like a day...
Is this actually true?
For an immortal being any finite amount of time would be like a day, or like a minute, or like a second...
Another ambiguity which religionists such as yourself use to wiggle your way out of factual errors in your "perfect" book.
Sorry, unlike the ark, it just doesn't hold water...oh, I suppose an ocean is like a teaspoon to god, so when he said "flood" he actually meant "trickle".
Never mind...
“Your head is on the block and you worry about your whiskers?”
The king James version has it:
"But of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil thou shalt not eat of it for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die"
Now we know that Adam and Eve can eat of any tree in the garden, including the tree of life since that too sits in the garden yet hasn't been forbidden. We know that on the day God prevents them from eating of that tree he condemns Adam and Eve to death. We know that his motive for doing so is their eating of the forbidden fruit. On the day that Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit they were therefore condemned to die, so on the day they ate the fruit their death was assured because eternal life was withheld. By this reading God isn't a liar, nor does it appear to be a particularly tortuous reading of the text.
Best I can do.
I'm confused, in which version of the Bible does it say that they would die instantly please? Obviously they did not instantly die because they were kicked out of Eden and went on to have children. But yes, eventually they died but not from eating the forbidden fruit. The Bible is also pretty clear on the fact that they did not lead brief lives. If you read Genesis 5 it clearly states that people were living almost to be almost to 1000 years old!
Adam and Eve had it made. They didn't have to work, they didn't have to farm for food, they didn't have to worry about anything, everything for them was provided. They had one rule to follow and they willfully disobeyed. It's the same when you have kids, there has to be discipline. I don't believe in making threats, if I tell you specifically how you're going to be punished if you violate Mom's rules, then you're getting punished. In this case, God told them exactly what would happen and it did.
When I read the phrase "condemns innocent unborn children" it instantly makes me think of abortion and I am very Pro-Life. Let's move on.
These alleged "innocent people" weren't as innocent as you might think. They were demon worshipers who offered their own children as a sacrifice to Baal. They knew the rules too but chose to disobey. They were immoral, they probably had sexual rituals involving children since they seemed to have no problem throwing their children into the fire as human sacrifices. They raised thechildren they didn't kill up in this religion. If God had permitted them to live they would have eaten through humanity like a cancer.
In Genisis 6 it says "Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God. 10 Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth.
11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth". He saved Noah and his family. When he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah God said he would spare the city if ten righteous people could be found which of course there weren't.
I don't see any similarity to Muslim extremists, they would just kill everybody.
[deleted]
you've been huffing the ahhmemories glue too long.
you two are still the same person though right? i liked you better when you at least pretended to be the sane one.
How would you know what isis believes? Ate you a member of this ....JUDAEO Islamist - atheist both of goat *beep* child molesters/ God DAMN free will southern baptist traitor pigs?
U sound as such.
So suck ass.
Adolf Hitler was brought to power by the Jews.
The sooner the world knows the better the world.
How would you know what isis believes?
By their deeds shall ye know them.
So suck ass.
You beat me to it. In a BIG way.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
You beat me to it. In a BIG way.i doubt that
🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈 share
Don't mistake knowledge for understanding. The death to which God refers is not a physical death, though that is partly what He's referring to. Death entered the world through the transgression of Adam and Eve, and ended their immortal state (we do not know how long they lived in the garden before the fall, but they did not know sickness or death).
However, the reference to death, and the immediacy of it is a spiritual death, not a physical one. Adam and Eve lived in the presence of God, they communed with Him. They were spiritually alive, but when they rebelled and chose to disobey God, they died spiritually. In that sense, their death was in the same day they partook, and they became subject to the physical ailments of a mortal body, including disease and ultimately the death of the body.
What you also fail to understand is that while Adam and Eve brought death into the world God prepared for this and sent Christ to redeem mankind from death, both physical and spiritual. You perceive the world and God as finite, but those who die are not lost to God. We are talking about the death of the flesh, which is not a bad thing. The spirit lives on, and is eternal. You see death as permanent, as absolute, believing that you will not continue after the death of your body. With that understanding, then yes, God is vicious and cruel.
Only death is not permanent. And you will continue beyond the grave. You are His child, and He is perfect, as are His purposes. Could you learn compassion in a paradise void of suffering? Could you learn selflessness where there were none in need? Could you learn mercy and forgiveness where none could wrong you? The answer is no. This life has a purpose, and while we may not fully understand the purpose in the moment, rest assured that purpose is for our benefit.
In that sense, their death was in the same day they partook
The text says nothing about any such thing. You're just making it up. Isn't that forbidden by your religion?
God prepared for this and sent Christ to redeem mankind from death
If your deity existed (which, thank Bob, it doesn't) it would have been responsible for the whole mess in the first place. Coming down to earth masquerading as its own son is truly a pitiful bandaid solution. Get serious.
We are talking about the death of the flesh, which is not a bad thing.
The self-loathing your religion encourages is both embarrassing and unhealthy.
He is perfect, as are His purposes.
Right. So it created evil.
Could you learn compassion in a paradise void of suffering? Could you learn selflessness where there were none in need? Could you learn mercy and forgiveness where none could wrong you?
Firstly, none of those things would be needed in a perfect paradise. Secondly, if your deity had made humans (and the cosmos) perfect, they wouldn't be needed here.
This life has a purpose, and while we may not fully understand the purpose in the moment, rest assured that purpose is for our benefit.
Utterly and completely unconvincing.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
"In that sense, their death was in the same day they partook
The text says nothing about any such thing. You're just making it up. Isn't that forbidden by your religion? "
Actually the idea that spiritual death (not physical death) took place is basic Christian theology.
Christianity is primarily concerned with spiritual reality. Not physical reality. In fact, physical reality is not reality at all. It is something made in the image of true reality, which is spiritual reality. People think of the physical as being real are totally not going to understand the Bible at all.
For example, in John, when Jesus said, "You must be born again." You have Nicodemus, an educated Pharisee saying, "What! How can a man enter a second time into the womb to be born again?" He was assuming that Christ was talking about a second physical birth.
Obviously Christ was not. He was talking about a spiritual birth. We laugh now at Nicodemus wondering how he would think Jesus was talking about literally being physically born a second time.
Well, people continue to do the same thing. We think life means your body breathing and eating and so on. Nope. Physical life isn't life. It is the image of life. Just as humans were created in the image of God, so the body is something that is in the image of the spirit. The body isn't true reality. The spirit is.
So how did Adam and Eve instantly die? Think of a tree. It receives its life from the sun. While it is alive it does anyway. When it's dead, it just bakes in the sun. When Adam and Eve sinned, they became like a piece of petrified wood. No longer able to receive sustenance from God, who is like the sun in this analogy. The giver of life.
In fact, Christ said to his followers that they had to eat his flesh and drink his blood! Christ was obviously talking about Spiritually, not physically. He didn't come to give us physical life. He said he came to give us life, but if we already had it, what would be the point of giving people something they already had?
"He is perfect, as are His purposes.
Right. So it created evil.
He didn't create evil because evil is not a created thing. Evil is like darkness. Darkness doesn't actually exist. It is an absence. The absence of light. Evil is a vacuum, a vacancy, an emptiness. Evil is an illusion, a lie. Evil is the result of the illusions we create for ourselves when we separate ourselves from God. If you remove light from a room, you don't actually create darkness. Darkness is simply was is left behind when light is removed. Coldness isn't created. It is the absence of warmth. You cannot create coldness. Chaos is the absence of order. God did not create evil because it cannot be created. It is the absence of reality that is left behind when God is pushed out of our lives and something else is put in his rightful place. share
What you also fail to understand is that while Adam and Eve brought death into the world God prepared for this and sent Christ to redeem mankind from death, both physical and spiritual....
In other words, god planned for Adam and Eve to fail, right? Otherwise, how could could all the progeny and descendants learn all those wonderful things you mention?
Is it a sin to follow god's plan?
Sorry, but all your mental gymnastics are only the rationalizations of afterthought, not any sort of objective investigation in the search for truth, but rather the struggle to shore up the invisible and non-existent underpinnings of your faith (your "truth").
Whatever any evidence or logical argument, this is part of what is so distasteful so often from apologists of religion...nothing can sway them from their position, but they will do anything, use hook and crook, to sway others.
This is both disrespectful and arrogant...and has little hope of success except by fear or by brainwashing.
If nothing else, this is so anti-science...and anti-spiritual.
“Your head is on the block and you worry about your whiskers?”
Sorry, but all your mental gymnastics are only the rationalizations of afterthought, not any sort of objective investigation in the search for truth (...)Well, yes. Religion was (and is) created by the need of people to understand and make sense of their world - a world of which all of us still know too little, no matter how much education we were privileged to soak up along the way.
Unfortunately, the less you know and the less control you have over the world around you, the more prepared you are to accept even "outrageous" explanations. It all depends on whether or not those explanations can fulfill the needs that you have (usually those of a scared child, since most of us get exposed to religion at a very young age).
Whatever any evidence or logical argument, this is part of what is so distasteful so often from apologists of religion...nothing can sway them from their position, but they will do anything, use hook and crook, to sway others.Yeah, well... that's people for you. While the original philosophies always contain some precious gems, the enjoyment of them is ruined because people insist that everybody has to see them as "holy" and "untouchable".
Mind you, nowadays with all the fighting about who is right (or which religion is), it is practically impossible to approach a religious text the way it should be approached (IMHO): i.e. with the due respect that comes from learning about its context and author/s before deciding to use anything or discard it.
After all, every author (and certainly those of the religious texts) had their own view of the world. And one shouldn't forget their motivation, either. Wouldn't it be nice if you could sit down opposite one of them and ask them about why they wrote their texts in the way they did? I am sure, a lot of times you would find out that
a) they just couldn't do better, or
b) that they meant to educate people who wouldn't grasp the meaning any other way, or even
c) that they collected the "wisdom" of their ages and tried to distill it.
If you then think about "selling" your stories to your customers (i.e. the people around you), this would only work if you understood their world and managed to tell the stories in such a way that you engaged their imagination.
If nothing else, this is so anti-science...I fully agree.
...and anti-spiritual.Talking of "spiritual"... May I suggest Sam Harris' new book "Waking up"? It's a very good read. share
May I suggest Sam Harris' new book "Waking up"? It's a very good read.
I can believe that. What an insightful thinker he is. I've nothing but admiration for the man. If only there were more of him.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
...you haven't read the Bible in the first place? Adam and Eve died that "day". They were no longer under God's guidance. They aged, then went into oblivion. It's sort of like an unplugged fan. It slows down, then eventually stops. Adam lived for 930 years. Then he was gone.
I am the Alpha and the Omoxus. The Omoxus and the Omega
Satan (or Lucifer or the Devil or any other name) is not mentioned in Genesis. Satan isn't mentioned in the bible for quite awhile. You may infer the snake was satan, but why did God remove its legs and force it to slither on the ground if the serpent was innocently "possessed" by satan? (Not that being innocent seemed to matter much). So, it seems like there was a walking, talking snake in this crazy story.
share[deleted]
I would be probably be one of the people being beaten and clubbed to death for wanting to save the lives of me and my family.
IMO, that was one of the details that caught the inner spirit of the biblical narrative quite well. Absolutely EVERYBODY except for eight people deserved to drown in horrifying misery? Does anyone really buy that?
Apparently some do. Perhaps being clubbed to death before that happens is a kind of mercy.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
TakeUpReel i can see you did not read the bible very good, because in ravalation 12:9 Satan is called the old serpent.
9.And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
So, it seems like there was a walking, talking snake in this crazy story.
Yes and believing that we came from nothing is not crazy, a Evolutionist beliefs that the earth was only made out of lava and then it begin to rain and then after millions of years there was suddenly life, probably as bacteria deep in rocks and has been evolving ever since, and than after billions of years (Again) all the animals came and had other animals that was not the same anymore and become other animals, and (again) then we came after 100s of millions of years, and then suddenly 30 thousand years later we are here from of cores apes.
But he thats not crazy because it took Millions and Billions and of years.
PS the movie Noah (this movie) has nothing to do with the bible, the maker of the Film is Gnosticism or Gnostic, you hear never GOD in this movie only the creator, because Gnosticism or Gnostic believe that the real GOD made the creator, and the creator and he made earth and everything on it, so totally different, please read be mad at them or there books. share
a Evolutionist beliefs
I'm assuming you're unaware of how ignorant, dogmatic, and bereft of substance this single comment makes you look. "Evolutionist?" Are you really that lost in your fantasy world that you can't grasp what a tool you are to such agitprop rhetoric foisted on you by the priests who rule your mind? (Hint: this is a rhetorical question.)
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
Hey TakeUpReel dit you change your name to aaahmemories? wow thats the same name as that idiot from last time, but hey nobody is perfect.
Ow wow i forgot my name is nobody.
the same name as that idiot from last time
Translation: you have no substantive argument, so attempt to conceal that fact with irrelevancies. What a surprise.
Religion is like a rocking chair -- a lot of work to get nowhere.
AmigaWolf, I'm not sure that you read my post. I said that Satan isn't mentioned in Genesis. I didn't mention Revelation. (I could't find Ravalation, BTW).
The fact that Satan had to be backfilled into the story makes the snake in the garden scenario even more crazy. You would think Satan would be an important character to clearly write about from the very beginning.
If the snake was really Satan (in disguise), why did god make the snake crawl on its stomach and eat dirt (after he/it coerced Eve into eating the apple)?
I'm not sure where your evolutionist (or PS) commentary came from, because I didn't mention any of that either.
--
If vampires hate "plus signs" - imagine how they feel about the "square root" symbol.
Here they are in a beautiful garden, not having to hunt or farm for food, eternal life, etc... and Satan comes along, tempts Eve, she then causes Adam to sin, and then they get kicked out of paradise on Earth. God straight up told them what would happen but they disobeyed anyway. No one lied to them. They chose to disobey of their own volition.
So why would god put the tree there in the first place? God sure enjoyed playing headgames and testing his creations. If he created everything, seems like it would have been awfully easy to simply not put a tree of knowledge or anything else tempting thee, wouldn't it? The problem here is that either god is totally flawed and imperfect, or he likes to test his creations and mess with them. If he was "perfect" then he wouldn't have even bothered making a "what would happen if..." scenario in the first place. He'd know all possible outcomes beforehand and thus not even bother. The only other explanation is that he is deeply flawed and seemingly very twisted, as well, as he enjoys creating a scenario with several potential outcomes and then sitting back and watching his creations struggle with opting to be "good" or "evil," and calling it "free will" even though if they opt for the "bad" decision, they will get punished for it. It's not really free will if you are still being told to act a certain way or else you will be punished for eternity.
Then of course they have to throw the devil/snake in there just to twist things up even more. Never mind the fact that god also created the devil as well as the ability to "do evil" in the first place. Again, if god was so perfect, the whole "evil" thing would not have even happened. Everything is god's doing, including creating an angel who decided to turn against his own creator.
So the idea that God destroyed "innocent" people is totally false.Huh? How's that, again? Your "explanation" didn't explain a damn thing. God made a flood that killed everyone, it's pretty cut and dried, I don't know how any of what you said explains how it wasn't his fault that innocent people got killed. Are you talking about the movie here, or the Bible?! Because I thought we were talking about the movie. There's no way you can lump everyone into one big group of wickedness and wipe them ALL out except for one family and go, "yep, there was not an innocent one in there at all. They all deserved to be killed." Plus, how did god's project go so awry? He created everything and everyone, so if the whole thing went sour to the point where he was SO angry at his creations that he wanted to wipe them all out and start over, then that makes god, again, very deeply flawed. He also sure likes picking favorites.
I can't understand your crazy moon language. share