Original sin

[wageslave]

One day in Heaven, Adam and Eve are out having a stroll. Up pops God.

"Hi God", they both say, "what's up?"

"Kids", says the Almighty, "I've just planted this apple tree right here, but don't touch the apples or I'll kick you silly. Ok?"

"Ok" say the kids, and carry on frollicking around, merrily, as you would.

Anyway this snake pops up, and wanders over to Eve and asks her if she'd like a nice apple. Eve being all girly and stupid, decides to chomp on one, and with her womanly wiles (that she wasn't born with funnily enough) gets Adam to take a bite.

Seconds later and bang, boomshanka, the two kids are banned from Fortress Heaven to a dump called Earth and forsaken to begat several zillion begotten with ever-lengthening names until the old Testament ends.

Q: Who's the villain in this piece?

a) God, for planting the tree in the first case, crafty old codger.
b) Snake, for trying to introduce the apple-deprived kids of the joy of apples.
c) Eve, for being a woman (it's the Old Testament).

[Piscivore]

Originally posted by wageslave
Q: Who's the villain in this piece?

a) God, for planting the tree in the first case, crafty old codger.
b) Snake, for trying to introduce the apple-deprived kids of the joy of apples.
c) Eve, for being a woman (it's the Old Testament).

All of the above.

ETA: Don't leave Adam off the hook, either- if he'd had the good sense to have asked god for a sex robot, none of it would have happened.

[The Cats Venm]

d) The Apple, for allowing itself to be eaten.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Piscivore
All of the above.

ETA: Don't leave Adam off the hook, either- if he'd had the good sense to have asked god for a sex robot, none of it would have happened.

He didn't even need to do that! God let him try out the animals for good measure, and he wasn't happy with them. If he had just taken the sheep like any decent man would have...

[Dogwood]

Don't forget that God lied about the nature of the fruit and the snake told the truth.

[Bruce]

God for giving the kids free will.
God for giving the snake free will.
God for allowing the evil snake to exist.
God for getting pissed off when his kids don't obey him after he gave them free will.

Heck, if you're going to give your clay toys free will, don't throw them in the basement if they use it. Just take away their free will and play with the clay. Clay doesn't talk back. Clay isn't evil. Clay won't blame you for all the problems in it's life, because it doesn't have life. Clay is soft, and wet, and smooshy. Love the clay. Touch the clay.

[Skeptical Greg]

Don't forget this paradox, which I believe ends the whole discussion.

If A&E had no knowledge of good and evil before they ate the fruit, how could it have been a sin for them to do so?

[Bruce]

Originally posted by Diogenes
Don't forget this paradox, which I believe ends the whole discussion.

If A&E had no knowledge of good and evil before they ate the fruit, how could it have been a sin for them to do so?

:re: Whoa. Pass the doobie, man.

[1inChrist]

It's Adam and Eve's fault. They heard God's commands and chose to follow the Beast instead.

[lifegazer]

The story of Adam & Eve is a mystical narrative. Adam represents rationale and Eve represents emotional desire or need. Both aspects exist in all beings - both male & female.
This biblical-narrative has nothing to do with a man and a woman frolicking in a garden. It portrays the distinction between reason and emotion/desire and tries to explain why emotion/desire dragged us into the mess we find ourselves in.
... We cannot resist the urge to experience what might be divine. That's why humanity explores the unexplored, regardless of the danger. That's what sets us apart.
At the end of the day, it is our "Eve" which drives us onwards through life. Not that I am advocating this as right... my point is that skeptics know jack about spirituality/holyness.

[Bruce]

Originally posted by 1inChrist
It's Adam and Eve's fault. They heard God's commands and chose to follow the Beast instead.

Sheesh. They ate an apple. I mean, come on. They could have performed sodomy with the snake, chopped down the tree, burned down the garden, snorted the ashes, played ACDC music backwards, made wine out of the apples, gotten really drunk, and still have the nerve to ask for $20 to see a movie the following night.

I hope YOU never have kids.

[Bruce]

Originally posted by lifegazer
The story of Adam & Eve is a mystical narrative. Adam represents rationale and Eve represents emotional desire or need. Both aspects exist in all beings - both male & female.
This biblical-narrative has nothing to do with a man and a woman frolicking in a garden. It portrays the distinction between reason and emotion/desire and tries to explain why emotion/desire dragged us into the mess we find ourselves in.
... We cannot resist the urge to experience what might be divine. That's why humanity explores the unexplored, regardless of the danger. That's what sets us apart.
At the end of the day, it is our "Eve" which drives us onwards through life. Not that I am advocating this as right... my point is that skeptics know jack about spirituality/holyness.

So what you're trying to say is, that you are an infidel who doesn't take the Bible literally. Oh, you are so going to burn. Tell him, 1inC!!

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by 1inChrist
It's Adam and Eve's fault. They heard God's commands and chose to follow the Beast instead.
Which beast (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870626436#post1870626436) was that exactly? Your choices are me, Lisa, or Piscivore. (Oh, and Puss, if dragons are Beasts, not sure about that one.)

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Bruce
So what you're trying to say is, that you are an infidel who doesn't take the Bible literally. Oh, you are so going to burn. Tell him, 1inC!!
No... I'm trying to tell you that you are a bozo who does take the bible literally.
The bible is so-obviously not a [completely] narrative history of events in the Middle-East that I am dumbfounded by idiots - both religious and skeptical - who read it as such.
The primary aim of a spiritual writing is to portray a spiritual truth.
You guys need to do some research on biblical symbolism and parable.

Spend the rest of your lives laughing at biblical literalists if you like, but that makes you a biblical literalist also. Remember that, if nothing else.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by lifegazer
Spend the rest of your lives laughing at biblical literalists if you like, but that makes you a biblical literalist also. Remember that, if nothing else.
MdC: Puss, correct me if I miss my mark, but did he really just invoke the old "takes one to know one" defense?

Puss: Yes, dear lad, I'm afraid that he did.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
MdC: Puss, correct me if I miss my mark, but did he really just invoke the old "takes one to know one" defense?

Puss: Yes, dear lad, I'm afraid that he did.
Your puss is an hairy idiot.
... I am neither an atheist nor a biblical literalist.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by lifegazer
Your puss is an hairy idiot.
Don't tell him I said so, but I am often wont to agree. :D

... I am neither an atheist nor a biblical literalist.
...nor did anyone accuse you of such. You're God, we all know that, because we're God, too.

[1inChrist]

Originally posted by lifegazer
[B]The story of Adam & Eve is a mystical narrative. Adam represents rationale and Eve represents emotional desire or need. Both aspects exist in all beings - both male & female.
This biblical-narrative has nothing to do with a man and a woman frolicking in a garden. It portrays the distinction between reason and emotion/desire and tries to explain why emotion/desire dragged us into the mess we find ourselves in.

No Adam and Eve were the first people. God created them to be perfect but they disobeyed Him.

We cannot resist the urge to experience what might be divine. That's why humanity explores the unexplored, regardless of the danger. That's what sets us apart.
At the end of the day, it is our "Eve" which drives us onwards through life. Not that I am advocating this as right...

The Word warns of being open minded. Simple, close your mind and open your heart. If you open your mind you could let Satan in and he will taint your heart. Open your heart, let Jesus in and close your mind.

my point is that skeptics know jack about spirituality/holyness.

I agree they are naturalist fundamentalist and nothing more.

[Donks]

Originally posted by 1inChrist
No Adam and Eve were the first people. God created them to be perfect but they disobeyed Him.

So God tries to create perfect beings but fails, and his creations aren't perfect. Does that about cover it? So much for omnipotence.
Edit: And, he didn't know beforehand. So much for omniscience.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by 1inChrist
No Adam and Eve were the first people. God created them to be perfect but they disobeyed Him.

That presents a paradox: How could God create "perfect" beings who were capable of disobeying It?

The Word warns of being open minded.

Why? If I don't open my mind to alternatives, I'm just going to be one of the rest of the bozos who got indoctrinated by the establishment-truth inherent within the culture they were brought-up in.
Most of the skeptics here think that they are open-minded too. Yet if they were brought-up 300 years-ago they'd be Christians and would be hanging all the witches out there. They're just specific microphones of our time - harping a specific truth established by our time.
... In short, the skeptics here aren't open-minded and neither are you. You just represent a different aspect of the spectrum of established-truths which pulls the strings of the puppets that walk amongst the stage during any given act of the play known as "human existence".
If you were born in Tibet, you'd probably be a Buddhist. If you were born in the Middle-east, you'd probably be a moslem. If you were born in Rome around the turn of the 1st century, you'd probably be crucifying Christains.
Get my point? No? Then take my response to mean that an "open mind" is the only thing that can save mankind from establishment BS.

Simple, close your mind

Close your mind and let it be gullible to whatever BS you are force-fed?

and open your heart.

Open my heart? To what exactly? To the idea that I only have to say "Jesus loves me and has saved me" and it is so?

If you open your mind you could let Satan in

Who is Satan? Where does 'he' exist?
Are you infering that an entity exists apart from God?
Doesn't this impose a boundary upon the existence of your God?
Doesn't this boundary challenge the omnipotence and omnipresence of your God?
Is God capable of no "bad" act?
Doesn't this limit the power of your God?

Wake-up pal. Religion is a bigger scourge upon mankind than is materialism. Better to deny God than to proclaim It as a limited/finite portion of existence.

and he will taint your heart. Open your heart, let Jesus in and close your mind.

I know I'm wasting my time talking to you, whereas at least I have hope of reaching towards a scientific/materialistic person.
I have no faith in hearing any sense from a religious man. Sorry, but your ideas about God are repulsive to me. I'd rather mix with people that don't understand or believe in God than somebody who makes 'It' look like a complete f*****g idiot.

[chance]

Lifegazer The story of Adam & Eve is a mystical narrative. Adam represents rationale and Eve represents emotional desire or need. Both aspects exist in all beings - both male & female. Interesting interpretation. An alternative I have seen - Adam & Eve reject living in Eden (blissful ignorance) and elect to fend for them selves (gaining Knowledge) in the real world, it’s a tougher life but they get to decide that life.

In response to 1inChrist Lifegazer quoted <snip> I know I'm wasting my time talking to you, whereas at least I have hope of reaching towards a scientific/materialistic person.
I have no faith in hearing any sense from a religious man. Sorry, but your ideas about God are repulsive to me. I'd rather mix with people that don't understand or believe in God than somebody who makes 'It' look like a complete f*****g idiot. Well that was unexpected! (reminds me of Huxlies(sp) famous defending Darwin speech re- reference to his ‘personal ancestors’). Perhaps I have misjudged you, I’ll take your future posts more seriously.

[Bruce]

Originally posted by lifegazer
I am neither an atheist nor a biblical literalist.

Well, I'm neither a biblical literalist or a bozo, and I find your lack of jockularity quite boorish, and pretentious remarks quite tedious and asinine.





(Man, I just love this Merriam-Webster online thesaurous. There are all kinds of words to insult people with that won't be moderated.)

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by lifegazer
The story of Adam & Eve is a mystical narrative. Adam represents rationale and Eve represents emotional desire or need. Both aspects exist in all beings - both male & female.
This biblical-narrative has nothing to do with a man and a woman frolicking in a garden. It portrays the distinction between reason and emotion/desire and tries to explain why emotion/desire dragged us into the mess we find ourselves in.
... We cannot resist the urge to experience what might be divine. That's why humanity explores the unexplored, regardless of the danger. That's what sets us apart.
At the end of the day, it is our "Eve" which drives us onwards through life. Not that I am advocating this as right... my point is that skeptics know jack about spirituality/holyness.

I agree with you about halfway lg. The story of Adam and Eve is a metaphor on the scale you describe, but it's also a simple folk-tale on the order of "How the elephant got it's trunk" All ancient cultures have similar creation myths, but they were not necessarily intended to be Jungian descriptions of the collective unconscious. Many of them were probably also equal to the best thing a tired father could come up with when his daughter asked, "Where did everything come from daddy?"

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by 1inChrist
It's Adam and Eve's fault. They heard God's commands and chose to follow the Beast instead.

I noticed you capitalized "Beast" 1inChrist. I hope you're not falling into the trap of equating the snake in the garden with Satan/Antichrist. The Bible says nothing along these lines. It was just a talking snake.

[The Cats Venm]

Is it just me or is there something amusing about watching lifegazer and 1inChrist spar?


Please continue. I was never here...

[Cosmo]

Originally posted by lifegazer
Who is Satan? Where does 'he' exist?
Are you infering that an entity exists apart from God?
Doesn't this impose a boundary upon the existence of your God?
Doesn't this boundary challenge the omnipotence and omnipresence of your God?
Is God capable of no "bad" act?
Doesn't this limit the power of your God?

Wake-up pal. Religion is a bigger scourge upon mankind than is materialism. Better to deny God than to proclaim It as a limited/finite portion of existence. [/B]

I had to re-read that three times, and check the author another three times in order for me to get over my shock - it does seem like good old LG came across (to me at least) as a skeptic, if even for a minute. :)

What is god without religion, LG? Why do you cling to him still?

[kuroyume0161]

Well, at least LG's philosophical stance isn't dictated by old tomes and superstition. I'll give him a nod for a well written retort to 1inBwC.

I do, however, take offense to his equating skepticism/materialism with religious literalism. I was once a religious person, literal, figurative, almost transcendental in my beliefs at differing times. Half my life wasted in a fantasy world. But now I look at evidence and observation - historical, everyday, predictable, replicable - I don't see anything compelling beyond what we sense (to steal your jibe) to drive me to open my mind so much as to let my brain fall out and splatter logical gibberish all over the observable - our only "truth" of any merit. And it is not 'a truth for a time'. This has been an evolution of human expansion of consciousness for over three millenia - some may argue since we first made the split from our evolutionary ancestors several million years ago. As others have routinely and repeatedly pointed out, there is no possible way to change our 'reality' in a way that contradicts our ever-growing observations and observationally-based models.

What will your 'great soul shards reunited' proof provide that supercedes our every-more progressing success in learning about and applying that learning to the only reality we can experience?

If this reality (the one we sense) is all that we can influence and all that we can show to influence us, what better course of action than to understand that reality in order to influence it and understand the ways it influences us.

Kuroyume

[Ladewig]

Originally posted by lifegazer
No... I'm trying to tell you that you are a bozo who does take the bible literally.
The bible is so-obviously not a [completely] narrative history of events in the Middle-East that I am dumbfounded by idiots - both religious and skeptical - who read it as such.
The primary aim of a spiritual writing is to portray a spiritual truth.
You guys need to do some research on biblical symbolism and parable.

Spend the rest of your lives laughing at biblical literalists if you like, but that makes you a biblical literalist also. Remember that, if nothing else.


Why does spending the rest of my life laughing at Biblical literalists make me a Biblical literalist also? I can see all sorts of symbolism in the Bible, yet I will laugh heartily at those who launch expeditions to find Noah's Ark.

[The GM]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Why? If I don't open my mind to alternatives, (snip)Sorry, but your ideas about God are repulsive to me. I'd rather mix with people that don't understand or believe in God than somebody who makes 'It' look like a complete f*****g idiot.

Excellent, LG. Well put.

[RamblingOnwards]

Simple, close your mind and open your heart. If you open your mind you could let Satan in and he will taint your heart. Open your heart, let Jesus in and close your mind.

An unanswered question from another thread:

Would you accept that it is rare for people to convert to a religion they were not brought up in?


[A small indication for those who believe in logic -

Uk Census of religion split by ethnicity:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=395

'Clustering' of denominations by geographic location in the USA
http://www.adherents.com/maps/US_denom_cong.jpg

And this quote from the same site:

In most countries of the world, a majority of people (over 50%) are adherents of the same religion. In most nations where Christians make up the majority, the majority of the population are adherents of a single religious body (such as the Greek Orthodox Church in Greece, the Catholic Church in Poland, or the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Norway).

(http://www.adherents.com/adh_predom.html)

]

[c4ts]

Original sin is like this: God loves you very much. Being all knowing, he deliberately (because omniscience would imply that all of God's actions are deliberate) sets up a universe in which everybody but two people go to hell for something they didn't do, and then he asks us to apologize, and by "apologize," I mean show up at my organization every Sunday, believe everything I say, and toss in some money every time I pass around the collection plate. Why? Because the Bible says so. Never mind that the Bible doesn't really answer why God would do such a thing, but here's a quote that says God does it anyway, straight from the mouth of God, who is way smarter than you so don't argue with him or question his motives. Now hop right on my bandwagon and don't mutter anything about "conversion tactics" or I'll send you right back where you came from. Oh, and pull down your pants, because God needs to see your *** so he can rape you properly.

[Zombified]

Here's what I don't get.

We start out with humans who are basically animals with no knowledge of good or evil. The Christians also claim that they're immortal until original sin. God's got these two "trees": the knowledge of good and evil, and everlasting life. With me so far?

So God says "say, don't eat off of those trees." Now, for whatever reason, they do, but see, until they do, they don't understand anything about good or evil so why would they have any idea eating the apple is bad? This is not an informed choice they're making, is it?

Now having done this, God thinks "oh, no, what if they eat the everlasting life fruit too?" But see, until God punishes them, they're already immortal, so what's the problem?

Not only that, but God tosses them out and takes away everlasting life, but not only that, he says, in effect, "if you behave, you will be rewarded with everlasting life".

In other words, if you apply the knowledge you weren't supposed to have, God'll give you the other fruit He was trying to keep you away from in the first place.

Does anyone else find this confusing?

[c4ts]

I still don't understand what the snake and the tree were doing in the garden in the first place. Why does God need to test things if he already knows the outcome? Unless this is saying he's not all-knowing after all.

[crimresearch]

Originally posted by Dogwood
I noticed you capitalized "Beast" 1inChrist. I hope you're not falling into the trap of equating the snake in the garden with Satan/Antichrist. The Bible says nothing along these lines. It was just a talking snake.

And once again, NoneinChrist reveals that he doesn't know even the most basic tenets of Christianity...he's never heard of Lilith, he doesn't know the other details about the Garden, he thought he could get to heaven without accepting Christ as his Savior, and so on...

Has there ever been a sock puppet with more seams showing?

[c4ts]

Originally posted by crimresearch
And once again, NoneinChrist reveals that he doesn't know even the most basic tenets of Christianity...he's never heard of Lilith, he doesn't know the other details about the Garden, he thought he could get to heaven without accepting Christ as his Savior, and so on...

Has there ever been a sock puppet with more seams showing?

Oddly enough, a sock puppet would be less obvious.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by lifegazer
The story of Adam & Eve is a mystical narrative. Adam represents rationale and Eve represents emotional desire or need. Both aspects exist in all beings - both male & female.
This biblical-narrative has nothing to do with a man and a woman frolicking in a garden. It portrays the distinction between reason and emotion/desire and tries to explain why emotion/desire dragged us into the mess we find ourselves in.
... We cannot resist the urge to experience what might be divine. That's why humanity explores the unexplored, regardless of the danger. That's what sets us apart.
At the end of the day, it is our "Eve" which drives us onwards through life. Not that I am advocating this as right... my point is that skeptics know jack about spirituality/holyness.
Its hard to know if your interpretation reflects what the writers of Genesis had in mind, but as good a time as any to plug the skeptical interpretation of Genesis as allegory:

http://wiki.skepticpie.com/index.cgi?Genesis_Symbolism

[Ladewig]

Has anyone introduced 1inChrist to the story of "Kissing Hank's Behind"? I think that tale pretty much sums up what most people on this board hear when 1inChrist speaks.

[Zombified]

Originally posted by Ladewig
Has anyone introduced 1inChrist to the story of "Kissing Hank's Behind"? I think that tale pretty much sums up what most people on this board hear when 1inChrist speaks.
That would require 1inChrist to read, which would just be Satan tricking him.

1inChrist makes lifegazer sound sorta reasonable... wow.

[SezMe]

Originally posted by lifegazer
The bible is so-obviously not a [completely] narrative history of events in the Middle-East that I am dumbfounded by idiots - both religious and skeptical - who read it as such.
The primary aim of a spiritual writing is to portray a spiritual truth.
You guys need to do some research on biblical symbolism and parable.
That's all well and good, but the topic is a biblical story, which most certainly is NOT spiritual writing. The whole bible is political writing aimed at various historical audiences to get them to buy into a new cult at the time and finally assembled in somewhat final form centuries later to please the then current rulers.

Read it as such, not historically or spiritually, and it you might be able to understand it ... not the content, that is, but why it is such a mess.

[SezMe]

Originally posted by lifegazer
Why? If I don't open my mind to alternatives, I'm just going to be one of the rest of the bozos who got indoctrinated by the establishment-truth inherent within the culture they were brought-up in. .............
Wow! All of us poor bozos are just indoctrinated fools, but you, lifegazer, rose above it all. Great to have you here among the unwashed. Tell us, how did you do it?

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by SezMe
That's all well and good, but the topic is a biblical story, which most certainly is NOT spiritual writing. The whole bible is political writing aimed at various historical audiences to get them to buy into a new cult at the time and finally assembled in somewhat final form centuries later to please the then current rulers.

Read it as such, not historically or spiritually, and it you might be able to understand it ... not the content, that is, but why it is such a mess.
You don't seem to have grasped my initial point:-
The bible IS a book largely full of symbolic and mystical meaning.

No amount of self-serving denial can change what is a definite fact.

[SezMe]

Originally posted by lifegazer
You don't seem to have grasped my initial point:-
The bible IS a book largely full of symbolic and mystical meaning.

No amount of self-serving denial can change what is a definite fact.
And you don't seem to have grasped MY point - that is political, not "symbolic and (especially) mystical. No amount of self-serving denial can change ... oh, never mind.

[Vim Razz]

Originally posted by wageslave
Q: Who's the villain in this piece?

a) God, for planting the tree in the first case, crafty old codger.
b) Snake, for trying to introduce the apple-deprived kids of the joy of apples.
c) Eve, for being a woman (it's the Old Testament). I say: d) Adam, for denying responsibility for his own complicity and blaming everything on Eve and the snake.

Eve made an honest mistake, but Adam was a coward who actively betrayed everyone with his dishonesty about his role in the fiasco, henceforth setting a terible standard for men everywhere.

So sayith the Vim.
amen