Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-12-2013, 11:36 AM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 10:57 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(12-12-2013 10:47 AM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” This was said prior to the fall, indicating, straight from “God’s” mouth, that they were capable of baring children prior to the fall.

And he was already aware that they would not stay in paradise - he said "earth". And he was pretty shortsighted, multiplying doesn't replenish anything, it strips the earth of resources.

And "replenish" is a weird way of stating it anyway. Replenish meaning, to refill, or fill back up again, indicating that it was previously full. I'm not going to argue that, based on bible text, the world was once previously full of people, and that we can only assume something happened to them all (probably “God” killing them all again), then "God" created Adam and Eve to "replenish" the earth of it's missing people.

But this is the way the apologist mind works. Things that are clearly not stated in the bible, such as Adam and Eve not having blood prior to the fall, will be claimed because of some other part of the bible, that also clearly does not say that thing, but they feel free to make any implications they like as long as the result remains something they like, and ignore the further implications of that very statement.

If it were beneficial, to the apologist, to state that "replenish" did mean there were people prior to Adam and Eve, then they would make that claim. For example, if they felt the use of the word “replenish” helped explain the Australopithecines, and early Homos (don't laugh, it's what they are called) in the world before modern man, and claim that the bible 'accurately' describes Homo sapiens being created after them, then they would use something as inconsequential as a word that says "replenish", as long as it doesn't cause other problems with other text, dogma, or ideology.

I'm a good apologist appearently. I could see some Chrisitans using that example I just made up, if they accept the age of the earth, and early Hominids, but want to hold to "biblical literalism". But other Christians you denie this, as it does not conform to "biblical literalism". As a Chrisitan, what you choose to key in on and ignore just depends on what you want to belief, and how you want to go supporting that claim. But it all requires leaps and omissions in order to maintain their assertation.

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2013, 11:44 AM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
If i'm correct God has got to have the most objective view for the universe(being omnipotent and all)and yet for some bizarre reason he gets super obsessed with life inside a small planet in one of the several solar systems in the universe.

[Image: jupiter-etc.jpg]

[Image: You_Are_Here_Milky_Way1.jpg]

Seriously from God's POV we're just a freckle of the universe ! why is God so damn obsessed over a single dot in the universe ? God has got some serious mental issues.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes IndianAtheist's post
12-12-2013, 11:44 AM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(11-12-2013 02:34 PM)Yasmin Wrote:  But that's the interesting point: did He create flawed creatures? At the end of creation God deems everything 'good.' Did God create creatures who were flawed and disposed to disobeying God or did they simply exercise their free will by choosing to disobey Him?
Both.


(11-12-2013 02:34 PM)Yasmin Wrote:  Knowledge of a choice doesn't mean determination of that choice.
(11-12-2013 02:34 PM)Yasmin Wrote:  It's interesting because it relates to anyone who sets boundaries. If I tell my nephew when we're cooking together 'you can touch everything in the kitchen except the hot stove,' am I setting him up for failure by making that boundary and 'tempting' him? Of course not. The Genesis account is about trust: can you trust that God's provided everything you need or are you going to push outside the limit and assume there's something more? God knew the action, but that doesn't mean he forced it.
You are there to protect your nephew if he indicates he is about to disobey. And, if you don't, then yes you are setting him up for failure.

But let's use a better example. If you knew someone was allergic to a food that would kill them if they ate it, but they didn't know they were allergic to the food, would you seat them right next to the food and tell them not to eat it? And, if they ate the food and died, would you consider yourself not guilty since they made the choice to eat it? Why would you even seat the person there to begin with? Now imagine you could see into the future beforehand and so you knew the person would eat the food and die. Now would you still seat them there? (I'm using death in this example because it's the closest I can come to the colossal consequence of original sin, sickness, natural disasters, etc. that God dished out to Adam, Eve, and all of humanity over this.)

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
12-12-2013, 11:46 AM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 11:34 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(12-12-2013 11:27 AM)Impulse Wrote:  Let me make this real simple. God is omnipotent (that's what you believe, right?) We have pain and suffering. God could have made everything exactly the same minus the pain and suffering (yes exactly the same otherwise - he's God after all).
The omnipotence means ability to do anything argument - which is conveniently forgotten in every omniscience v. free will thread. Angel
The ability to do anything is exactly the meaning that was intended. I really don't get your point. This is as much about omnipotence as omniscience. Drinking Beverage

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2013, 11:50 AM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 11:44 AM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  [Image: You_Are_Here_Milky_Way1.jpg]

And that is actually an EXTREME close up view of us too, relative to the actual size and scope of the universe.

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2013, 11:55 AM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 11:46 AM)Impulse Wrote:  The ability to do anything is exactly the meaning that was intended. I really don't get your point. This is as much about omnipotence as omniscience. Drinking Beverage
The point is that with that definition, an omnipotent god can be omniscient and give man free will. However, in omniscience v. free will threads, critics argue that it's logically impossible for the two to coexist, the implication being that omnipotence does not include the ability to do the logically impossible.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2013, 12:13 PM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?

English is not my native language.
that awkward moment between the Premortal Existence and your Resurrection
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2013, 12:16 PM (This post was last modified: 12-12-2013 12:29 PM by Alla.)
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
sorry

English is not my native language.
that awkward moment between the Premortal Existence and your Resurrection
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2013, 12:27 PM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 10:47 AM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  
(11-12-2013 06:26 PM)Alla Wrote:  Adam was created in the image and likeness of God and he did NOT have earthly parents(was not created in the image of men/flesh and blood). God has no blood.
How do we know this? NO flesh and BLOOD can inherit or be in the kingdom of God.(See 1Cor 15:50)
So by your “revelation” about this, Adam was created of flesh, in “God’s” own image, prior to the fall. Which Indicates that “God” has flesh in heaven. After all, based on your own logic, the only reason Adam would have flesh, or blood, prior to the fall, is if "God" did have flesh, or blood. However the scripture you quoted states “NO flesh and BLOOD can inherit or be in the kingdom of God.(See 1Cor 15:50)”.
Your reasoning for Adam not having blood, prior to the fall, is based on this verse, which by the same reasoning Adam should not have flesh prior to the fall, but we see that the bible says he does, prior to the fall. The premise is there for faulty, and as such cannot be used as an explanation for why, as you claim, Adam and Eve had no blood prior to the fall.
Adam had body "flesh and bones" and so do Gods. But they do not have body "flesh and blood"
In the Scriptures mortal man called "flesh and blood" NOT "flesh and bones" But immortal man has body of flesh and bones according to the Scriptures. Adam said that Eve is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones. Resurrected God Son has body "flesh and bones"
Gods have body "flesh and bones" and this is how Adam was created "flesh and bones"

[
(12-12-2013 10:47 AM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  i]And getting back to my original question[/i], what would any of that have to do with having a child anyway. If Adam and Eve did not need blood to deliver oxygen and nutrients to their brains, and body tissues, and regulate their core temperatures, and the other vital functions it performs, then why would it be necessary for giving birth? And where in the bible does it say, this is the reason they could not give birth? Or where in the bible does it even say they could not have children, prior to the fall?
In Genesis 1:28, “God” says to Adam and Eve, “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” This was said prior to the fall, indicating, straight from “God’s” mouth, that they were capable of baring children prior to the fall.
Those are good questions and points.
I don't remember in which post I said that I ASSUME that they couldn't have children because they didn't have blood. My assumption can be wrong.
Scriptures doesn't say why they wouldn't have children before fall. But I have another ASSUMPTION why they wouldn't have children.
Probably their bodies had capacity to have children but here I see the problem.
Remember that they didn't realize that they were naked? It reminds me innocent children who do not see their nakedness. Do you think they would have a desire to have sex?
Do you think their "blood" would "boil" when they saw each other naked?
What happens to you when you see sexy and beautiful naked woman next to you and who is your wife?
What happens to me when I see naked and handsome guy next to me and who is my husband?
I guess we both know.
But Adam and Eve were like innocent children, they even didn't know they were naked. I can ASSUME they didn't care about sex.
What do you think/assume?
[/quote]

English is not my native language.
that awkward moment between the Premortal Existence and your Resurrection
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2013, 12:35 PM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 11:55 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(12-12-2013 11:46 AM)Impulse Wrote:  The ability to do anything is exactly the meaning that was intended. I really don't get your point. This is as much about omnipotence as omniscience. Drinking Beverage
The point is that with that definition, an omnipotent god can be omniscient and give man free will. However, in omniscience v. free will threads, critics argue that it's logically impossible for the two to coexist, the implication being that omnipotence does not include the ability to do the logically impossible.
First of all, I never said any of this makes sense. I quite agree that it doesn't and it's why I don't believe any of it. What I'm discussing though is, if the Adam and Eve story is true, then there are conclusions that logically follow. Believers in the Adam and Eve story also typically believe that God is both omnipotent and omniscient, so both are fair game in the discussion. Also, I don't agree that omnipotence does not include the ability to do the logically impossible. That would be a limit on omnipotence which would then negate omnipotence. Finally, I don't agree that anything I have said falls into "logically impossible" (from a theist point of view).

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: