|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,495 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,495 Likes: 1 |
[/quote]
Not really I think. The “caveat” or condition to eating of the fruit was on the very day you eat of it you shall die (spiritually) and begin dying physically.
The spiritual death could be forgiven by faith, confession and repentance like now. The coming physical death was irreversibly determined like now unless the Second Coming precludes it.
I guess I didn't know it said Spiritual death. Missed that one. I remember reading once that the word "day" in Hebrew in the book of Genesis was a 24 hour period. I thought that was interesting. Doesn't it also say that after eating it you will be as gods? If I remember correctly it says we are sons of the most High so that would make us sons of God already. [quote]What moral implications? Where would that have come from? I'm not sure where they might of come from............spiritual/frequency maybe...............but it must have some kind of affect since Cain killed Abel.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337 |
Not really I think. The “caveat” or condition to eating of the fruit was on the very day you eat of it you shall die (spiritually) and begin dying physically.
The spiritual death could be forgiven by faith, confession and repentance like now. The coming physical death was irreversibly determined like now unless the Second Coming precludes it.
I guess I didn't know it said Spiritual death. Missed that one. I remember reading once that the word "day" in Hebrew in the book of Genesis was a 24 hour period. I thought that was interesting. Doesn't it also say that after eating it you will be as gods? If I remember correctly it says we are sons of the most High so that would make us sons of God already. What moral implications? Where would that have come from? I'm not sure where they might of come from............spiritual/frequency maybe...............but it must have some kind of affect since Cain killed Abel. while not a popular theses, but the fact that we had "kill" or violence in our bloodline since very early on, was and has been one of the key ingredients of our human species' success down here on the earth. it's newer better ideas, and technologies overcoming the less effective, efficient and fatal. that allows the better ideas to manifest over poorer, less adaptive ideas. ideas live in human skulls. to allow an idea to flourish, kill off some skulls that house competing ideas. ala, that in large part is what has got us to where we are now down here on the urth.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
Let me pull one example that I scanned here that shows poor understanding and presuppositions upon which you declare God an unjust tyrant. I refer to your referring to Eve as a 14 yo girl and the “illegal” Apple as a “marshmallow” which upon her (and Adam) eating of it caused the Fall of mankind and the incomprehensible unjustness of it all.
First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.
Secondly, the Fall was cataclysmically catastrophic spiritually, physically, and to the environment. Some animals became meat-eaters and the ground now grew thistles and thorns. Adam and Eve, who were created to live forever, might have had “IQ’s” of five hundred and they knew God and walked with Him. In all of this, as perfect, brilliant (?), free moral agents, they were given one one law, one caveat, one restriction. And they failed.
Thus your unjustness of a righteous and perfect God, the creator of everything, fades into reasonable even with limited human understanding.
Apologies if I misread your comment.
George, I compared eve to a 4 year old, not a 14 year old. The typical 14 year old girl already has basic understanding of right and wrong, good and evil. From what tree did she eat; the tree of knowledge of good and evil. So regardless of any assertion you make regarding their computational IQ, they still did not posses the knowledge of good in evil, or know right from wrong, so your assertion they were brilliant and perfect but where not morally developed as today's average 14 year old is a non-starter. As for the morality of the question, we can begin with our own Constitution and the 8th Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.In addition, we have no history of imprisoning the son for the crimes of the father. Each is held accountable for their own crimes after where the state hold the burden of proof against each specific individual. Besides, that's presuming any of it is true in the literal sense, you still haven't met the scientific objections to your position above.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.
If Eve was created from Adam's rib, that would mean that they were related and Cain and Abel were products of incest. not only that, which means we're all cloned from clones. but also the fact that neither adam nor eve had belly buttons. the rest of us do. And who did Cain and Abel marry? And Enoch the 3rd son, after one had already been killed built a city before he had any kids....where did all the people come from to populate this "city".
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337 |
First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.
If Eve was created from Adam's rib, that would mean that they were related and Cain and Abel were products of incest. not only that, which means we're all cloned from clones. but also the fact that neither adam nor eve had belly buttons. the rest of us do. And who did Cain and Abel marry? And Enoch the 3rd son, after one had already been killed built a city before he had any kids....where did all the people come from to populate this "city". i can only raise my head, and say that i don't know. i think so much of the stuff written by the scribes described the stories they had been told. anything not of this earth could have been called "god" because what else would they have called them. god walked with adam and eve in the garden? well, true enough, but what were the scribes describing as "god?" well, to them it was god. not of this world, someone or something with infinite technological power over what the herders had. afterall, none had attended gov't school per se. but someone did pass down or share the ability to write on scrolls, tablets, etc. the oral tradition had long been extant. so, speech was an early adaptation. i suppose ancient hebraic language was the one most preferred?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
So if your son brings your car home late you should kill him, or make a torture chamber in your basement and burn him forever, and then everyone else in your town?
Lets take this a step further. How about putting a marshmallow in front of 4 year old, who doesn't know the difference between right and wrong, good and evil, and tell her not to eat it. If she does, then punish everyone for ever for her "original sin".
Why ask more questions when your gross ignorance and complete bias against the subject is glaringly apparent? You have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about and are not willing in any way to have a reasonable discussion. I will not be trolled further with your diatribe. Antelope Sniper is far from ignorant. He is “ unseeing” as far as a Spiritual Dimension, but so are those who argue for an inerrant bible which can serve as a textbook. “ Willfully ignorant” best describes those who cling to a conception of God promoted by politicians of a bygone era. The one unchanging constant in the Bible is NOT God.......... but Human Nature. One should study the Bible to learn more about Oneself.....not God.......if bible study floats your boat. Well said. Yea, gotta like 'ol Gene philosophy of focusing on one's self and what you can control first. He kind of has some Buddhist elements to his Christianity.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
The concept of prohibited incest, does not come about until long after the flood. The logical reason for this is that Adam and Eve were perfect, having perfect genetic makeup, and therefore procreating would not be subject to the genetic defects that came later. As time progressed, those defects accumulated, so procreation of close relatives eventually became a biological problem.
What about the moral implications about incest? What moral implications? Where would that have come from? So, if the only moral implications for incest derive from the implications of birth defects in children, what is your take on the morality of incest between consenting adult close relatives when child birth is not possible?
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.
If Eve was created from Adam's rib, that would mean that they were related and Cain and Abel were products of incest. not only that, which means we're all cloned from clones. but also the fact that neither adam nor eve had belly buttons. the rest of us do. And who did Cain and Abel marry? And Enoch the 3rd son, after one had already been killed built a city before he had any kids....where did all the people come from to populate this "city". i can only raise my head, and say that i don't know. i think so much of the stuff written by the scribes described the stories they had been told. anything not of this earth could have been called "god" because what else would they have called them. god walked with adam and eve in the garden? well, true enough, but what were the scribes describing as "god?" well, to them it was god. not of this world, someone or something with infinite technological power over what the herders had. afterall, none had attended gov't school per se. but someone did pass down or share the ability to write on scrolls, tablets, etc. the oral tradition had long been extant. so, speech was an early adaptation. i suppose ancient hebraic language was the one most preferred? Gus, We know the Noah flood story was plagiarized from the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, because we have the cuneiform tablets, as I recall, with one version in the London Museum. We see similar types of parallels from the Epic of Gilgamesh stories of Enkidu/Shamhat and Adam/Eve. ] In both, a man is created from the soil by a god, and lives in a natural setting amongst the animals. He is introduced to a woman who tempts him. In both stories the man accepts food from the woman, covers his nakedness, and must leave his former realm, unable to return. The presence of a snake that steals a plant of immortality from the hero later in the epic is another point of similarity. So both stories, the Garden of Eden and Noah's flood are just Hebrew rewrites of earlier Sumerian myths. Parts of Gilgamesh were also borrowed from Epic of Atrahasis, including the Flood myth didn't appear in the oldest version of Gilgamesh, but was added later. Both Epics were written in many version over nearly a millennium with each borrowing from the other along the way, and the Hebrew's later plagiarizing from them. We know this, because we have the texts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_of_Gilgamesh#See_also
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,258
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,258 |
The concept of prohibited incest, does not come about until long after the flood. The logical reason for this is that Adam and Eve were perfect, having perfect genetic makeup, and therefore procreating would not be subject to the genetic defects that came later. As time progressed, those defects accumulated, so procreation of close relatives eventually became a biological problem.
What about the moral implications about incest? What moral implications? Where would that have come from? So, if the only moral implications for incest derive from the implications of birth defects in children, what is your take on the morality of incest between consenting adult close relatives when child birth is not possible? That's a really interesting question. Having not thought on that, my answer will be strictly off the cuff... My take, and it's mine alone and subject to correction, is that if child birth is truly not possible, then there is no possibility of harm - assuming we're talking about adults acting in freedom, and it's a life long commitment. Someone may be along to correct me, but I can't think of a more appropriate answer. I know. It sounds strange - but there it is.
Lunatic fringe....we all know you're out there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,258
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,258 |
First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.
If Eve was created from Adam's rib, that would mean that they were related and Cain and Abel were products of incest. not only that, which means we're all cloned from clones. but also the fact that neither adam nor eve had belly buttons. the rest of us do. And who did Cain and Abel marry? And Enoch the 3rd son, after one had already been killed built a city before he had any kids....where did all the people come from to populate this "city". Referring back to the "incest" issue - remember that Adam and Eve, and their immediate descendants, lived for hundreds of years. Remember - genetically perfect; ideal environment. They would have had ample time to produce lots of offspring.....and their offspring. Play with "what if" math, and it's easy to see how this works out. And just because Genesis doesn't mention other offspring, doesn't mean they didn't exist. In fact, this very question suggests that there were many other children.
Lunatic fringe....we all know you're out there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
The concept of prohibited incest, does not come about until long after the flood. The logical reason for this is that Adam and Eve were perfect, having perfect genetic makeup, and therefore procreating would not be subject to the genetic defects that came later. As time progressed, those defects accumulated, so procreation of close relatives eventually became a biological problem.
What about the moral implications about incest? What moral implications? Where would that have come from? So, if the only moral implications for incest derive from the implications of birth defects in children, what is your take on the morality of incest between consenting adult close relatives when child birth is not possible? That's a really interesting question. Having not thought on that, my answer will be strictly off the cuff... My take, and it's mine alone and subject to correction, is that if child birth is truly not possible, then there is no possibility of harm - assuming we're talking about adults acting in freedom, and it's a life long commitment. Someone may be along to correct me, but I can't think of a more appropriate answer. I know. It sounds strange - but there it is. Your answer really isn't all that strange, and sums up the views of Jeremy Bentham, considered my some scholars to be one of the earliest and extreme libertarians. His philosophy revolved around the evaluation of actions in the terms of suffering and harm to others. I have you a simplified version of one of a measure of libertarian sometimes refereed to as a "Bentham Test", which involved something that at least some in our society would consider unacceptable, but didn't involve infliction of harm or suffering on others. Don't worry, the Conservatives will be along soon to tell you how abjectly immoral you are for your position, but unable to tell you why, not realizing their emotional response is a psychological reaction to their high levels of Disgust Sensitivity. According to Bentham, your is actually the more logical, rational, and unemotional position.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,410 Likes: 9
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,410 Likes: 9 |
First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.
If Eve was created from Adam's rib, that would mean that they were related and Cain and Abel were products of incest. not only that, which means we're all cloned from clones. but also the fact that neither adam nor eve had belly buttons. the rest of us do. And who did Cain and Abel marry? And Enoch the 3rd son, after one had already been killed built a city before he had any kids....where did all the people come from to populate this "city". Cain is the 1st child mentioned and probably the majority of Christians will say that he was the 1st born but the Bible doesn't say that. There could have been any number preceding him. There was no prohibition on marrying children or siblings so there could have been quite a few people before Cain was born. In fact, when God expelled him, his concern was that those 'other people' would kill him. There were apparently quite a few by that time.
“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
― George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.
If Eve was created from Adam's rib, that would mean that they were related and Cain and Abel were products of incest. not only that, which means we're all cloned from clones. but also the fact that neither adam nor eve had belly buttons. the rest of us do. And who did Cain and Abel marry? And Enoch the 3rd son, after one had already been killed built a city before he had any kids....where did all the people come from to populate this "city". Cain is the 1st child mentioned and probably the majority of Christians will say that he was the 1st born but the Bible doesn't say that. There could have been any number preceding him. There was no prohibition on marrying children or siblings so there could have been quite a few people before Cain was born. In fact, when God expelled him, his concern was that those 'other people' would kill him. There were apparently quite a few by that time. Read the story in context. 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. 4:2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. The story goes straight from being driven from the garden to the birth of Cain, with no mention of intervention centuries of births and the construction of cities etc. Your reading doesn't pass the "sophomore test", i.e. composition and narration skills at least equal to that expected in a sophomore English class. Stretch and twist in the spirit of Ruth Bader Ginsburg as much as you like, but you hypothesis does not pass a plain reading of the text.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337 |
there might have been competing colonies of humans placed down here on the earth, from different extraterrestrial colonization attempts. cross-breeding was probably an option, given that everyone came from the same universe, universal creator.
we know that the original orders issued to the hebraic military/priesthood was to kill the heathens, and wipe out their dna.
sounds like competing factions for the control of the land area of the earth, doesn't it?
once again we're into ideology. and we know that ideology lies between the two ears of humans.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,126 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,126 Likes: 3 |
Let me pull one example that I scanned here that shows poor understanding and presuppositions upon which you declare God an unjust tyrant. I refer to your referring to Eve as a 14 yo girl and the “illegal” Apple as a “marshmallow” which upon her (and Adam) eating of it caused the Fall of mankind and the incomprehensible unjustness of it all.
First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.
Secondly, the Fall was cataclysmically catastrophic spiritually, physically, and to the environment. Some animals became meat-eaters and the ground now grew thistles and thorns. Adam and Eve, who were created to live forever, might have had “IQ’s” of five hundred and they knew God and walked with Him. In all of this, as perfect, brilliant (?), free moral agents, they were given one one law, one caveat, one restriction. And they failed.
Thus your unjustness of a righteous and perfect God, the creator of everything, fades into reasonable even with limited human
understanding.
Apologies if I misread your comment.
George, I compared eve to a 4 year old, not a 14 year old. The typical 14 year old girl already has basic understanding of right and wrong, good and evil. From what tree did she eat; the tree of knowledge of good and evil. So regardless of any assertion you make regarding their computational IQ, they still did not posses the knowledge of good in evil, or know right from wrong, so your assertion they were brilliant and perfect but where not morally developed as today's average 14 year old is a non-starter. As for the morality of the question, we can begin with our own Constitution and the 8th Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.In addition, we have no history of imprisoning the son for the crimes of the father. Each is held accountable for their own crimes after where the state hold the burden of proof against each specific individual. Besides, that's presuming any of it is true in the literal sense, you still haven't met the scientific objections to your position above. They were created perfect and as free moral agents though they had not the experience of evil or sin they had the knowledge of a command to not eat of the fruit of that tree by a God they knew personally. AS, as to morality and the constitution, it is irrelevant to the question here regarding Adam and Eve.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
there might have been competing colonies of humans placed down here on the earth, from different extraterrestrial colonization attempts. cross-breeding was probably an option, given that everyone came from the same universe, universal creator.
we know that the original orders issued to the hebraic military/priesthood was to kill the heathens, and wipe out their dna.
sounds like competing factions for the control of the land area of the earth, doesn't it?
once again we're into ideology. and we know that ideology lies between the two ears of humans. So, Adam and Eve's kids marries kids from the separate creations of other space aliens we call gods, then the Christian space alien god ordered his followers to wipe out the families they married into from the other space alien gods? Is that your hypothesis? What evidence for your space alien god hypothesis do you have that's better supported the the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection?
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337 |
there might have been competing colonies of humans placed down here on the earth, from different extraterrestrial colonization attempts. cross-breeding was probably an option, given that everyone came from the same universe, universal creator.
we know that the original orders issued to the hebraic military/priesthood was to kill the heathens, and wipe out their dna.
sounds like competing factions for the control of the land area of the earth, doesn't it?
once again we're into ideology. and we know that ideology lies between the two ears of humans. So, Adam and Eve's kids marries kids from the separate creations of other space aliens we call gods, then the Christian space alien god ordered his followers to wipe out the families they married into from the other space alien gods? Is that your hypothesis? What evidence for your space alien god hypothesis do you have that's better supported the the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection? the problem as i see it, for us minority adventurers, as i perceive it, is that the alien hypotheses works well right up to the point that someone dares to ask: "well, where did the aliens come from?" that is, what was the process that allowed the aliens (extraterrestrials) to populate the earth? at that point we're thrown into mental disarray. truely, where did they come from, and why did they choose to colonize earth? but, assuming they did all of that and for good reason, then my storyline helps explain why the hebrews under direction of the mighty YHWH were such natural borne killers in the attempts to manifest The Kingdon down here on this outlier planet in the solar system? with permission, let's make this solar system an outlier in the existing milky way galaxy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
Let me pull one example that I scanned here that shows poor understanding and presuppositions upon which you declare God an unjust tyrant. I refer to your referring to Eve as a 14 yo girl and the “illegal” Apple as a “marshmallow” which upon her (and Adam) eating of it caused the Fall of mankind and the incomprehensible unjustness of it all.
First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.
Secondly, the Fall was cataclysmically catastrophic spiritually, physically, and to the environment. Some animals became meat-eaters and the ground now grew thistles and thorns. Adam and Eve, who were created to live forever, might have had “IQ’s” of five hundred and they knew God and walked with Him. In all of this, as perfect, brilliant (?), free moral agents, they were given one one law, one caveat, one restriction. And they failed.
Thus your unjustness of a righteous and perfect God, the creator of everything, fades into reasonable even with limited human
understanding.
Apologies if I misread your comment.
George, I compared eve to a 4 year old, not a 14 year old. The typical 14 year old girl already has basic understanding of right and wrong, good and evil. From what tree did she eat; the tree of knowledge of good and evil. So regardless of any assertion you make regarding their computational IQ, they still did not posses the knowledge of good in evil, or know right from wrong, so your assertion they were brilliant and perfect but where not morally developed as today's average 14 year old is a non-starter. As for the morality of the question, we can begin with our own Constitution and the 8th Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.In addition, we have no history of imprisoning the son for the crimes of the father. Each is held accountable for their own crimes after where the state hold the burden of proof against each specific individual. Besides, that's presuming any of it is true in the literal sense, you still haven't met the scientific objections to your position above. They were created perfect and as free moral agents though they had not the experience of evil or sin they had the knowledge of a command to not eat of the fruit of that tree by a God they knew personally. AS, as to morality and the constitution, it is irrelevant to the question here regarding Adam and Eve. Of course it's relevant. Is it moral to punish someone for an action when they did not know it was wrong? Is it moral to punish someone for an act they did not committed, but committed by a distant ancestor? As for use of documents such as our Constitution, of course it's relevant when demonstrating you perfectly moral God fails to meet even the most basic standards of what we consider moral.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,016 Likes: 2 |
there might have been competing colonies of humans placed down here on the earth, from different extraterrestrial colonization attempts. cross-breeding was probably an option, given that everyone came from the same universe, universal creator.
we know that the original orders issued to the hebraic military/priesthood was to kill the heathens, and wipe out their dna.
sounds like competing factions for the control of the land area of the earth, doesn't it?
once again we're into ideology. and we know that ideology lies between the two ears of humans. So, Adam and Eve's kids marries kids from the separate creations of other space aliens we call gods, then the Christian space alien god ordered his followers to wipe out the families they married into from the other space alien gods? Is that your hypothesis? What evidence for your space alien god hypothesis do you have that's better supported the the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection? the problem as i see it, for us minority adventurers, as i perceive it, is that the alien hypotheses works well right up to the point that someone dares to ask: "well, where did the aliens come from?" that is, what was the process that allowed the aliens (extraterrestrials) to populate the earth? at that point we're thrown into mental disarray. truely, where did they come from, and why did they choose to colonize earth? but, assuming they did all of that and for good reason, then my storyline helps explain why the hebrews under direction of the mighty YHWH were such natural borne killers in the attempts to manifest The Kingdon down here on this outlier planet in the solar system? And the same problem applies to those who attempt to substitute a supernatural god in place of your space aliens.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,337 |
there might have been competing colonies of humans placed down here on the earth, from different extraterrestrial colonization attempts. cross-breeding was probably an option, given that everyone came from the same universe, universal creator.
we know that the original orders issued to the hebraic military/priesthood was to kill the heathens, and wipe out their dna.
sounds like competing factions for the control of the land area of the earth, doesn't it?
once again we're into ideology. and we know that ideology lies between the two ears of humans. So, Adam and Eve's kids marries kids from the separate creations of other space aliens we call gods, then the Christian space alien god ordered his followers to wipe out the families they married into from the other space alien gods? Is that your hypothesis? What evidence for your space alien god hypothesis do you have that's better supported the the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection? the problem as i see it, for us minority adventurers, as i perceive it, is that the alien hypotheses works well right up to the point that someone dares to ask: "well, where did the aliens come from?" that is, what was the process that allowed the aliens (extraterrestrials) to populate the earth? at that point we're thrown into mental disarray. truely, where did they come from, and why did they choose to colonize earth? but, assuming they did all of that and for good reason, then my storyline helps explain why the hebrews under direction of the mighty YHWH were such natural borne killers in the attempts to manifest The Kingdon down here on this outlier planet in the solar system? And the same problem applies to those who attempt to substitute a supernatural god in place of your space aliens. yes, there's realtime problems when at the base of the barrel, humans don't know from whence they came, where they are, nor where they are headed next. but we know all of that. what we need now is a good story to help extricate ourselves from this mess?
|
|
|
|
|
227 members (12344mag, 257 roberts, 10Glocks, 300jimmy, 2UP, 27 invisible),
1,638
guests, and
1,108
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,750
Posts18,495,280
Members73,977
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
