2 of 5
2
Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
Posted: 02 February 2014 02:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10

CuthbertJ

As I said, I got yours, you missed mine.

Any theist who sees your post will shut down and not even consider the larger moral issue thanks to your rant without argument.

My point to you is that as a non-believing apologist, you suck at converting anyone to a more moral stance.

Your motive for being in this section seems to just be self serving. I hope I am wrong.

Regards
DL

[ Edited: 02 February 2014 03:29 PM by Greatest I am ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2014 02:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
Greatest I am - 02 February 2014 02:16 PM

As I said, I got yours, you missed mine.

Any theist who sees your post will shut down and not even consider the larger moral issue thanks to your rant without argument.

My point to you is that as a non-believing apologist, you suck at converting anyone to a more moral stance.

Your motive for being in this section seems to just be self serving. I hope I am wrong.

Regards
DL

It would be helpful if you would indicate who you are responding to.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2014 03:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6166
Joined  2009-02-26

well, IMHO, it is rodin who failed the IQ test. And of course that is why he is a theist.

The the bible IS all about control and fear.  The Inquisition credo:

The 1578 handbook for inquisitors spelled out the purpose of inquisitorial penalties: ... quoniam punitio non refertur primo & per se in correctionem & bonum eius qui punitur, sed in bonum publicum ut alij terreantur, & a malis committendis avocentur. Translation from the Latin: “... for punishment does not take place primarily and per se for the correction and good of the person punished, but for the public good in order that others may become terrified and weaned away from the evils they would commit.”[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition

rodin, that is terrorism, which you fail to see.

I am speaking of fundamentalism, not of modern Christianity which might be compared to Green Peace or Red Cross or even Atheist Humanism.

[ Edited: 02 February 2014 03:31 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2014 03:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10
Lois - 02 February 2014 02:20 PM
Greatest I am - 02 February 2014 02:16 PM

As I said, I got yours, you missed mine.

Any theist who sees your post will shut down and not even consider the larger moral issue thanks to your rant without argument.

My point to you is that as a non-believing apologist, you suck at converting anyone to a more moral stance.

Your motive for being in this section seems to just be self serving. I hope I am wrong.

Regards
DL

It would be helpful if you would indicate who you are responding to.

Lois

It is usually the one above but you are correct in showing a better form.

Changed it.

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2014 04:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10
Write4U - 02 February 2014 03:26 PM

well, IMHO, it is rodin who failed the IQ test. And of course that is why he is a theist.

The the bible IS all about control and fear.  The Inquisition credo:

The 1578 handbook for inquisitors spelled out the purpose of inquisitorial penalties: ... quoniam punitio non refertur primo & per se in correctionem & bonum eius qui punitur, sed in bonum publicum ut alij terreantur, & a malis committendis avocentur. Translation from the Latin: “... for punishment does not take place primarily and per se for the correction and good of the person punished, but for the public good in order that others may become terrified and weaned away from the evils they would commit.”[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition

rodin, argue the good in that one.

Thanks for this.

Have you seen this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om6HcUUa8DI

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2014 07:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  69
Joined  2007-08-27

Write4u

1   Nobody here from this forum has administered to me an IQ test so saying I falied one is 1 a lie 2) impossible to fail.    I wonder what missing those those 2 facts puts your IQ at? 

2   Another false attribution you make is associating me personally with the Inquisition..  Which church authored that handbook?  Do you know if I have joined that church/group or if I abide by any   denominational doctrines?  No you don’t.  And for the record I do not.  I am a bible believing Christian who’s only authorities are 1)  Jesus, the Father and the Holy Spirit=God the Trinity   2)  the 1611 KJV Bible 3)  the pastor and deacons of my chosen congregation.  4) my local, state and fed government and only if those laws do not conflict with the Bible’s stated commandments/instructions.

This is the kind of posting I am rarely going to respond too.  I’ll say it again .....think before you post and separate your opinions from researched facts and don’t make attributions to individuals you haven’t asked or can’t quote from their past posts.

As someone else said it’s bad form in the least and I say down right lying/slander at the worst.  Try to be more careful.

[ Edited: 02 February 2014 07:39 PM by rodin46 ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2014 09:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6166
Joined  2009-02-26
rodin46 - 02 February 2014 07:26 PM

Write4u

1   Nobody here from this forum has administered to me an IQ test so saying I falied one is 1 a lie 2) impossible to fail.    I wonder what missing those those 2 facts puts your IQ at? 

2   Another false attribution you make is associating me personally with the Inquisition..  Which church authored that handbook?  Do you know if I have joined that church/group or if I abide by any   denominational doctrines?  No you don’t.  And for the record I do not.  I am a bible believing Christian who’s only authorities are 1)  Jesus, the Father and the Holy Spirit=God the Trinity   2)  the 1611 KJV Bible 3)  the pastor and deacons of my chosen congregation.  4) my local, state and fed government and only if those laws do not conflict with the Bible’s stated commandments/instructions.

This is the kind of posting I am rarely going to respond too.  I’ll say it again .....think before you post and separate your opinions from researched facts and don’t make attributions to individuals you haven’t asked or can’t quote from their past posts.

As someone else said it’s bad form in the least and I say down right lying/slander at the worst.  Try to be more careful.

Yes, I thought about that when posting, as I rarely post ad hominems.  But this was a light hearted response to post #2 by Lois.
I also drew a clear distinction between the fundamentalist bible thumpers and the modern christians who reject the terrorism of the OT, even as they believe in a supreme being. For Christ sake, get rid of that monstrous book.

The story of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge had nothing to do with sinning which is a relative term, but is a metaphor for mankind becoming intelligent and thereby leaving the natural innocence of other animals. Leaving paradise may well be a metaphor for the migration of early hominids from Africa.

As to your piety, I don’t care. As long as you do not publicly and vehemently denounce the atrocities committed in the name of god by any and all religious zealots, you and I have little to discuss about the sins Eve may or may not have committed. You may want to read the story of Hypatia.
http://www.womanastronomer.com/hypatia.htm

Every religion which claims exclusive rights to God’s approval is by definition exclusive in its very nature, which tends to confound the languages, don’t you agree or is the language of your religion the only revealed truth?

btw. god created male and female at the same time with the first species which possessed male and female DNA, long before man appeared on the scene. There were billions of males and females of every kind, millions of years before mankind became “intelligent” enough to alter its environment, rather than adapt to it.

But, if you want to read about Genesis you may want to look at the Hellstrom Chronicle and discover which species also were created in god’s image and choosen by god to have dominion over the earth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7R8UN9zGD04&list=PL1B32852440A9A973

[ Edited: 02 February 2014 09:18 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2014 11:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  191
Joined  2010-10-09

A parable, if you will:

Second Law of Thermodynamics: the energy in any closed system tends, over time, to decay to a state of maximum entropy, i.e. maximum disorder. When this happens, the energy in the system is incapable of performing any useful work within the system. This means, pretty much, that the system has reached a state of maximum uselessness; it is of no further use to anyone.

Any fundamentalist Belief System (or BS) is by definition a closed system, since within the system no change or modification is permitted.

Therefore, any fundamentalist BS will, over time, inevitably decay to a state of maximum entropy, maximum disorder, and maximum uselessness.

The Universe is also, by definition, a closed system.

From this it would appear that any attempt to impose a fixed, unchanging Order on the Universe, will over time inevitably result in maximum Disorder; which, depending on how you squint at it, might at the present time be construed as either A Good Thing or A Bad Thing.

According to the Book of Genesis, “God” attempted to impose a fixed unchanging Order on the Garden of Eden, which he evidently wished to be a closed system. The inevitable conclusion from this is that “God” didn’t understand the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which he supposedly created along with everything else.

This in itself is grounds enough for suspicion; but it would seem that the real hero of the Book of Genesis is the Serpent, who spoke the truth (“Thou shalt not die”) to Adam and Eve - despite knowing that “God” would punish him for it - and who thereby provided the means for human beings to break out of the closed system of Eden, push the inevitable entropic decay of the Universe into the far distant future, and allow History to happen.

Any reasonable reading of the Garden of Eden story (recognising, of course, that the story is mythology and not history) makes it painfully obvious that “God” is definitely The Bad Guy here, who wanted the humans he had created to remain stupid and ignorant, so that they’d be no trouble. When they ate the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge and became intelligent and uppity, they were of no further use to “God” as slaves, so he kicked them out of the Garden to find out stuff for themselves and take responsibility for their own decisions; which, from our point of view, was the best of all possible outcomes. A lazy, untroubled life in the Garden might have been OK for a while, but eventually it would inevitably (due to natural entropic processes) have become thoroughly boring; the descendents of those who accepted the Serpent’s Challenge (“thine eyes shall be opened”) became witchdoctors, shamans, artists, alchemists, witches, wizards, Natural Philosophers, and - eventually - scientists, technologists and engineers.

So by any intelligent standard, eating the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge wasn’t in any sense, Eve’s (and thus humankind’s) first “Sin”; on the contrary, it was Eve’s First Good Idea, and we should all be suitably grateful to her for it.

TFS

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 February 2014 06:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10

Theflyingsorcerer

I agree to your well put post and conclusion.

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 February 2014 09:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  983
Joined  2005-01-14
rodin46 - 01 February 2014 08:33 AM

Precisely.  Without that understanding about our gift of free will which comes from His having free will then blaming God for a setup and/or the Devil made me do it become excuses for not obeying and being/taking responsibility for one’s decisions and actions which is proof we were made in God’s image as independent moral agents in His creation.  Apart from God we naturally with our fallen nature make all our decisions apart from His words and assistive guidance, wisdom, protection and love. 

Except for one small problem.  If we were made in God’s image, where did that “fallen nature” come from?  Are you saying God built that INTO us?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 February 2014 09:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  983
Joined  2005-01-14
PLaClair - 01 February 2014 09:48 AM

Yes but according to the story, she lacked the understanding necessary to appreciate the meaning or consequences of her action. The tree is called the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Plainly, this part of the story is a metaphor about how humans come to a level of awareness at which moral responsibility makes sense, or is even meaningful. But then as the story continues, it gets stupid. Disobedience is seen as deserving of punishment, which is absurd considering that the premise is that Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil until they ate of the tree. As Julia Sweeney puts it, “How did this beautiful story get so fucked up?!” The answer lies in where it was taken after the first few passages.

That’s also an excellent point, and what led me to question the story as a 14 year old Southern Baptist reading the Bible for myself for the first time.

As a parable it might work.  But the second you start taking it seriously as something that might have happened to Real People, the flaws are obvious.  However much free will Adam and Eve had, they would have had no more experience with deception or evil than a one year old baby.  Once you grow up, it’s obvious the whole thing is just a myth to explain how evil can exist in a universe created by God.  Given the assumption that God is perfect, it can’t be HIS fault, so it must be humanity to blame!  (Yeah, that’s the ticket!)  Except that there’s another hole.  If evil already existed in the form of the Serpent, it can’t be our fault either!  The blame still goes squarely back into God’s lap, unless it was impossible to create a universe without evil.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 February 2014 09:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  983
Joined  2005-01-14
Theflyingsorcerer - 02 February 2014 11:13 PM

...it would seem that the real hero of the Book of Genesis is the Serpent, who spoke the truth (“Thou shalt not die”) to Adam and Eve - despite knowing that “God” would punish him for it…

That fact was not lost on me as a teenager, either.  God actually LIED when he said, “thou shalt surely die”, because obviously Adam and Even didn’t die!  It was the Serpent who told them they would have the knowledge of good and evil, which is exactly what happened!  And I can’t begin to describe the agony it caused for a devout kid like me!  It’s no exaggeration to say my worldview at that time took a severe tumble!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 February 2014 08:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
Greatest I am - 02 February 2014 03:29 PM
Lois - 02 February 2014 02:20 PM
Greatest I am - 02 February 2014 02:16 PM

As I said, I got yours, you missed mine.

Any theist who sees your post will shut down and not even consider the larger moral issue thanks to your rant without argument.

My point to you is that as a non-believing apologist, you suck at converting anyone to a more moral stance.

Your motive for being in this section seems to just be self serving. I hope I am wrong.K

Regards
DL

It would be helpful if you would indicate who you are responding to.

Lois

It is usually the one above but you are correct in showing a better form.

Changed it.

Regards
DL


Thanks. It’s just that sometimes another post intervenes.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 February 2014 09:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27

“The 1578 handbook for inquisitors spelled out the purpose of inquisitorial penalties: ... quoniam punitio non refertur primo & per se in correctionem & bonum eius qui punitur, sed in bonum publicum ut alij terreantur, & a malis committendis avocentur. Translation from the Latin: “... for punishment does not take place primarily and per se for the correction and good of the person punished, but for the public good in order that others may become terrified and weaned away from the evils they would commit.”


Isn’t that exactly what today’s Muslims think they’re doing when they cut off hands of thieves and stone women for “adultery,” which includes being raped? (At least that’s their justification.)

Maybe they got the idea from the Christians to punish “for the public good in order that others may become terrified and weaned away from the evils they would commit.”

However, it doesn’t work that way, the public doesn’t get “weaned away from the evils they commit” as has been proven time and again by Christians and Muslims and similar sadistic groups. Violence begets violence. That’s the only effect violence has.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 February 2014 06:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10

Lois

I am not good with art an I am waiting for the cash to get a hearing aid but this sounds fairly good to me and shows well the thinking of the religious hierarchies. From what I can make out in any case.

I would prefer as transcript to be sure but have a listen if you have the time and give your thoughts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om6HcUUa8DI

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 5
2