God - a study in pointlessness.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

---

Yet you believe that he provided us with a user guide that is so poorly-written that after thousands of years people are more divided than ever as to how to interpret it, but they all seem to agree that if you don't do as god commands, he will punish you for all of eternity. That simply doesn't jibe with the idea of someone who cares about us as individuals. You wouldn't ever even think of treating another person the way god threatens to treat humanity, yet you consider him to be the hallmark of loving kindness. It really is bizarre.

---

Our interpretation of scripture is worlds apart. For one thing the bible is not a user guide. I don't consult the bible to see if I should go to a ball game or not. It's also one of the most acclaimed works of literature of all time. Although the message of salvation is simple, most of it can be difficult to interpret. Obviously, God wanted us to have to work to grasp the meaning of much of it. In the course of our search, we arrive at different conclusions on points of doctrine, but still, the message of salvation comes through clearly - faith in Christ. It's a free gift from a loving God given to us through one individual who is Jesus Christ. Hell is simply being in a place without the influence of God, which we have freely chosen. Do you want him to force you to be with him?

The idea of Jesus being the actual son of God is contrary to the Old Testament doctrine, specifically Genesis chapter 6. It was the sons of God banging women that caused all of the problems that led to the flood and the mass kill off of life.

[Lek]

No. The world didn't change because of two peoples' actions. The very balance of nature did not rest upon the behavior of two individuals.

Actually, it did. If they hadn't disobeyed God the world would not have changed. He told them "read my lips; don't eat of the fruit of that tree." Sounds pretty clear to me. If he hadn't taken action, he would have been a liar. I guess I don't have much to say about the subject.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

No. The world didn't change because of two peoples' actions. The very balance of nature did not rest upon the behavior of two individuals.

Actually, it did. If they hadn't disobeyed God the world would not have changed. He told them "read my lips; don't eat of the fruit of that tree." Sounds pretty clear to me. If he hadn't taken action, he would have been a liar. I guess I don't have much to say about the subject.

The Bible says that you should marry your close relatives. Is it a good idea to ignore that command?

[Deepthought]

Okay, that's why god should care. Perhaps now, you can explain why he obviously doesn't, when so many of his custom-made individual creations die in such stupid and terrifying ways, many of them as defenseless infants and children (and earlier).

As I said many times already, when man sinned it changed the way of the world and we all suffer the consequences. He showed he cared by allowing us to live eternally in happiness. Suffering must be a necessary part of life on earth because he came and also suffered an agonizing death. People blame God for all the suffering on earth while, at the same time, they themselves cause suffering to come upon helpless infants and others. Unfortunately, suffering is in the world. We have a responsibility to try to alleviate suffering when we can, but it doesn't last forever. We have eternity to look forward to. That's my take on it.

All I'm reading about God or Jesus and their intent is assertion or catechisms. Provide the evidence that Jesus said particular things. Indeed prove that Jesus as portrayed by Christians even existed. The bible by the way is not evidence. The gospels give very different accounts of what Jesus said and did. A great deal is known about the bible (just watch some of the documentaries on the History channel etc. if you're too lazy to read) and most of what we know just does not confirm - indeed refutes the bible stories. The trouble with religion is that it is based upon faith, not evidence. Why should I have to accept the words/viewpoint of Jesus, Muhammed, Buddha etc? In science, you don't need to accept the scientist's findings - you can prove it for ourselves. So whether or not Newton existed, you can establish the laws of notion for yourself through experimentation and logical reasoning. Science does not have personality worship, because the person is not important - the evidence is. Even renowned scientists get it wrong on some things. Einstein refused to accept quantum mechanics, but an understanding of quantum mechanics underpins our sophisticated electronic devices. So stop being a bore and repeating the same phrases about Jesus/God and provide some verifiable evidence. Put up or shut-up.

[Esquilax]

Actually, it did. If they hadn't disobeyed God the world would not have changed. He told them "read my lips; don't eat of the fruit of that tree." Sounds pretty clear to me. If he hadn't taken action, he would have been a liar. I guess I don't have much to say about the subject.

I never get an answer to this question, so maybe you'll do better: what was the purpose of the tree? Why was it there?

[Deepthought]

No. The world didn't change because of two peoples' actions. The very balance of nature did not rest upon the behavior of two individuals.

Actually, it did. If they hadn't disobeyed God the world would not have changed. He told them "read my lips; don't eat of the fruit of that tree." Sounds pretty clear to me. If he hadn't taken action, he would have been a liar. I guess I don't have much to say about the subject.

Lek, only Christians came up with the sick idea of 'original sin'. Why should the descendants of Adam, suffer for the crimes of Adam? Using this despicable notion would you think your children should be punished for a crime (or sin) that you commit?

[Ryantology]

Actually, it did. If they hadn't disobeyed God the world would not have changed. He told them "read my lips; don't eat of the fruit of that tree." Sounds pretty clear to me. If he hadn't taken action, he would have been a liar. I guess I don't have much to say about the subject.

Oh, he's not a liar?

Genesis 2:16 - 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.”

All God said in his warning was that they would die. He said nothing about turning the world into a random deathtrap. He said nothing about punishing all of mankind for what they did. Not until after they did it. Then, all of a sudden...

Genesis 3:17-18 - “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.

He made the punishment far worse than he initially said, and only after the deed was done. That, my good apologist, is pure, malicious deceit. Because, he already knew he was going to do it.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

---

Actually, it did. If they hadn't disobeyed God the world would not have changed. He told them "read my lips; don't eat of the fruit of that tree." Sounds pretty clear to me. If he hadn't taken action, he would have been a liar. I guess I don't have much to say about the subject.

---

Oh, he's not a liar?

Genesis 2:16 - 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.”

All God said in his warning was that they would die. He said nothing about turning the world into a random deathtrap. He said nothing about punishing all of mankind for what they did. Not until after they did it. Then, all of a sudden...

Genesis 3:17-18 - “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.

He made the punishment far worse than he initially said, and only after the deed was done. That, my good apologist, is pure, malicious deceit. Because, he already knew he was going to do it.

Those are some excellent points. Of course there was no celestial entity paling around with a couple of humans in a garden.

IMO, the God entity was an Assyrian/Babylonian or Persian Emperor and the Adam guy was one of his local minion kings who betrayed him to his enemy, most likely to the the Egyptian Pharaoh. There's a story in the Old Testament about the king of Tyre doing something that ticked off the big guy. It even makes reference to the king living in the Garden of Eden. So the Adam & Eve story could simply be a version of that story.

[Lek]

I never get an answer to this question, so maybe you'll do better: what was the purpose of the tree? Why was it there?

The tree that they ate from was the knowledge of good and evil. Satan told them the lie that they would not die if they ate from the tree, but he also told the truth when he said they would "be like God, knowing good and evil," Genesis 3:4.

---

All God said in his warning was that they would die. He said nothing about turning the world into a random deathtrap. He said nothing about punishing all of mankind for what they did. Not until after they did it. Then, all of a sudden.

The bible tells us that he said they would die. That doesn't mean that he didn't tell them anything else. Also, even if he didn't tell them, he wasn't required to. Do you think they would have made a different choice if he had?

[Fidel_Castronaut]

For the faithful, righteous and patient will be eternal heaven which is better than this world to unimaginable level and for the unfaithful, and wrongdoers is eternal hell. This is what I believe is justice.

And that is also why people like you are so dangerous and unpredictable.

Rather then wait for people who don't believe in the same imaginary sky being as you to go to hell, you and your ilk are more than content to make it a hell here on Earth.

I hope you're proud of yourself.