That reminds me, Drich insists that there is no contradiction between Genesis and the real world because Adam and Eve simply lived for billions of years in Eden until they walked into God's honey trap. Yet, the very first thing he told them to do after he created them was "be fruitful and multiply". Yet, it explicitly mentions in Chapter 4 that they didn't get around to this until after they got evicted. The fuck took them so long?

(January 28, 2014 at 11:19 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: That reminds me, Drich insists that there is no contradiction between Genesis and the real world because Adam and Eve simply lived for billions of years in Eden until they walked into God's honey trap. Yet, the very first thing he told them to do after he created them was "be fruitful and multiply". Yet, it explicitly mentions in Chapter 4 that they didn't get around to this until after they got evicted. The fuck took them so long?

I see what you did there. I doubt it took them so long considering they had three kids after getting out of the garden.

In seriousness though, it says Adam lived to be what, nine-hundred something? That would preclude the several billion year waiting period.

(January 29, 2014 at 12:15 am)Darkstar Wrote: In seriousness though, it says Adam lived to be what, nine-hundred something? That would preclude the several billion year waiting period.

If memory serves, Drich's answer to that is that it was nine hundred years post fall, when he was mortal, and his justification for that is that the bible never says anything to contradict that... completely failing to take into account that the part where he lives nine hundred years is that contradiction.

One wonders why, if things are actually as the apologists say, they need to do so many mental flips in order to keep things straight.

(January 29, 2014 at 12:35 am)Esquilax Wrote: If memory serves, Drich's answer to that is that it was nine hundred years post fall

Either that or nine hundred "god years", with the duration of a god year (or day) being exactly what it would be if another system of time were actually being used, regardless of the fact that said system is internally inconsistent when applied to different areas of the Bible. Because the seven days to create the earth actually means billions of years, but when he says days later, he means actual twenty-four hour days.

(January 28, 2014 at 10:42 pm)Beccs Wrote: The story has always amused me.

An all knowing, all powerful deity created the whole universe, including CURIOUS humans and then placed the forbidden knowledge in the same garden as the humans.

Then he tells them not to touch it?

And this is the being Christians throw their faith in.

The being is either incompetent or evil.

It's crazy how so mean people see this story as more than it is, the story starts out with God's love for man and all He wanted was for man to love Him. To show that love it was to come through obedience. God walked with them through the garden every evening, they understood that God expected them to obey this one simple rule through the free will He gave them. They lived in a harmonious and loving relationship until Adam and Eve messed up. God knew what they had done the minute they disobeyed, yet when He came to them He was not raging as many seem to believe. God called out to them as a father to His children, asking where they were, even though He knew. Up until this point the relationship was based on absolute love, then the fall and the end ie. death of a perfect loving relationship.

GC

---

(January 6, 2014 at 2:25 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(January 6, 2014 at 2:12 pm)Drich Wrote: no because it would not be sin.

you assume that our acts/deeds have an intrinsic value.(that the intintional death of another is always wrong) They don't, even in our soceity. (per my example of the 3 year old and 30 year killing his brother)
Without knoweledge of sin, the acts loose the sin value.

So what you're saying is that Adam could have been a murdering, raping, arsonist pedophile, but as long as he kept away from that fruit, god wouldn't have seen anything actionable in any of that?

Your moral god would have looked upon that and been like, "hey, fine by me."?

No way Adam could have committed those acts without first eating from the Tree, those are all evil acts and that kind of knowledge was not available to Him until after He had disobeyed God and ate from the Tree. The sin of disobedience had to come first.

GC

Quote:It's crazy how so mean people see this story as more than it is, the story starts out with God's love for man and all He wanted was for man to love Him. To show that love it was to come through obedience. God walked with them through the garden every evening, they understood that God expected them to obey this one simple rule through the free will He gave them. They lived in a harmonious and loving relationship until Adam and Eve messed up. God knew what they had done the minute they disobeyed, yet when He came to them He was not raging as many seem to believe. God called out to them as a father to His children, asking where they were, even though He knew. Up until this point the relationship was based on absolute love, then the fall and the end ie. death of a perfect loving relationship.

Maybe its me but what's crazy is that this doesn't strike you as utterly weird, storywise.

We have God - all powerful, knowing etc. etc. wants a playmate that doesn't understand good from bad but will obey his every command without question or hesitation so that the dumbass playmate can earn God's "love."

This love lasts precisely as long as the total obedience lasts the second the "child" commits a single infraction he chucks them out.

Why are Christians unable to tell the difference between a perfect loving relationship and the total obedience demanded of a slave from his master?

(January 29, 2014 at 4:07 am)max-greece Wrote:

Quote:

---

It's crazy how so mean people see this story as more than it is, the story starts out with God's love for man and all He wanted was for man to love Him. To show that love it was to come through obedience. God walked with them through the garden every evening, they understood that God expected them to obey this one simple rule through the free will He gave them. They lived in a harmonious and loving relationship until Adam and Eve messed up. God knew what they had done the minute they disobeyed, yet when He came to them He was not raging as many seem to believe. God called out to them as a father to His children, asking where they were, even though He knew. Up until this point the relationship was based on absolute love, then the fall and the end ie. death of a perfect loving relationship.

---

Maybe its me but what's crazy is that this doesn't strike you as utterly weird, storywise.

I see this as a story of love because that's what it is, to me it's weird others do not see it that way, of coarse others have their agenda to try and destroy something they have no understanding of.

Quote:We have God - all powerful, knowing etc. etc. wants a playmate that doesn't understand good from bad but will obey his every command without question or hesitation so that the dumbass playmate can earn God's "love."

God's love is unconditional, anyone who can't see that knows nothing about what scriptures say. Obedience is our way of showing our love for God. They understood that there was a consequence for disobedience and they were not playmates, if that's what God wanted He would have made them like robots that couldn't cause Him hurt, easy to understand really.

Quote:This love lasts precisely as long as the total obedience lasts the second the "child" commits a single infraction he chucks them out.

Really, He could have simply destroyed them and made new ones, and He would have if He were who you say He is, since He didn't that must mean your ideas about God are wrong.

Quote:Why are Christians unable to tell the difference between a perfect loving relationship and the total obedience demanded of a slave from his master?

Oh, we can, it's the nonbelievers who can't see the love of God, they do not have enough sense to experience His love.

GC

(January 29, 2014 at 3:12 am)Godschild Wrote: No way Adam could have committed those acts without first eating from the Tree, those are all evil acts and that kind of knowledge was not available to Him until after He had disobeyed God and ate from the Tree. The sin of disobedience had to come first.

GC

Entirely untrue: if he was incapable of committing evil acts, and disobeying god is an evil act, then there could be no fall in the first place because Adam wouldn't have been capable of disobeying god to eat the fruit.

So since your premise is invalid, please proceed to tell me how it's only a certain set of evil acts that were impossible to commit, based on no consistent criteria beyond what's convenient to your argument. Be sure to tell me how little I know of the bible when you do!

Quote:they do not have enough sense to experience His love.

Yeah - that's what Simon LeGree said, too.