God doesn't understand iterative probability
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-05-2015, 03:12 PM
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
Why a fruit bearing tree? He could have made it the very large Rock of Good and Evil. Then they wouldn't have been able to eat or lift it up.

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-05-2015, 03:14 PM (This post was last modified: 07-05-2015 03:18 PM by Szuchow.)
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
(07-05-2015 03:09 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(07-05-2015 02:59 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  Well, they could have been aware that god commands aren't supposed to be questioned, not because of any sense of right and wrong but because he is ultimate authority, which would fit with the biblical theme I think.

As for expectations, you can not but I think one should not expect too much thought from biblical god.

That's another thing in Genesis, at no other time is a magical fruit needed to impart knowledge. In fact the story is internally contradictory, YHWH tells Adam not to do something thereby imparting knowledge by spoken instruction. Adam already knew what good and evil comprised of -obedience to YHWH's instruction, without eating the magical fruit.

Of course this would break the story narrative, the fruit was a plot device to drive the story and create a clear,dramatic situation of choice. It's obviously myth-making, it's a shame so many people can't see this blatant story-telling as nothing but a fairytale.

Shame it may be but as long as children would be indoctrinated then said shame would persist I think.

(07-05-2015 03:12 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  Why a fruit bearing tree? He could have made it the very large Rock of Good and Evil. Then they wouldn't have been able to eat or lift it up.

Intention of lifting it would have sufficed. And tree is way cooler or maybe it was of some significance to writers? Hebrew Yggdrasil?

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
08-05-2015, 05:43 AM
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
(07-05-2015 02:08 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(07-05-2015 02:03 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  [Citation needed]

From the book you mean? Or it's about this specific claim? If it's about claim then it is just arbitrary claim to make somewhat interesting interpretation of events, not some factual statement.

I just meant about the claim that one can't be immortal and capable of procreation. The definition of either doesn't lead to the other, so it looks like the author is making an assertion ad hoc to try and make excuses for a bad story. Like every apologist ever.


(07-05-2015 03:12 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  Why a fruit bearing tree? He could have made it the very large Rock of Good and Evil. Then they wouldn't have been able to eat or lift it up.

True. Again, it's like he wanted them to fail. The whole "importance of choice" thing never made sense. I could see if it were a one-time test for each person, so he can separate the "good" from the "bad", but he just leaves them there to keep being tempted over and over with no indication that he's going to change the status quo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-05-2015, 06:06 AM (This post was last modified: 08-05-2015 06:12 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
(08-05-2015 05:43 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(07-05-2015 02:08 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  From the book you mean? Or it's about this specific claim? If it's about claim then it is just arbitrary claim to make somewhat interesting interpretation of events, not some factual statement.

I just meant about the claim that one can't be immortal and capable of procreation. The definition of either doesn't lead to the other, so it looks like the author is making an assertion ad hoc to try and make excuses for a bad story. Like every apologist ever.


(07-05-2015 03:12 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  Why a fruit bearing tree? He could have made it the very large Rock of Good and Evil. Then they wouldn't have been able to eat or lift it up.

True. Again, it's like he wanted them to fail. The whole "importance of choice" thing never made sense. I could see if it were a one-time test for each person, so he can separate the "good" from the "bad", but he just leaves them there to keep being tempted over and over with no indication that he's going to change the status quo.

You're right, though I think this interpretation makes slightly more sense than standard one. Also god isn't jackass in it, he does not punish Adam and Eve, so believers might find it better than one about sin.

As for the importance of choice I think it made sense, though not necessarily from modern perspective, i.e. humans are mortal so something made them this way, or they done something to cause it. And this is part when on introduce tree/rock/whatever. Myth is explaining mortality.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-05-2015, 06:16 AM
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
I made a similar post to this on a Facebook group (one that is explicitly geared toward civil discussion), and I had someone bark bark at me that "if I'm going to bring up that non-zero bullocks, they should shoot me before I become a predatory pedo."

Fucking asshole.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-05-2015, 06:21 AM
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
(08-05-2015 06:06 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(08-05-2015 05:43 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  I just meant about the claim that one can't be immortal and capable of procreation. The definition of either doesn't lead to the other, so it looks like the author is making an assertion ad hoc to try and make excuses for a bad story. Like every apologist ever.



True. Again, it's like he wanted them to fail. The whole "importance of choice" thing never made sense. I could see if it were a one-time test for each person, so he can separate the "good" from the "bad", but he just leaves them there to keep being tempted over and over with no indication that he's going to change the status quo.

You're right, though I think this interpretation makes slightly more sense than standard one. Also god isn't jackass in it, he does not punish Adam and Eve, so believers might find it better than one about sin.

As for the importance of choice I think it made sense, though not necessarily from modern perspective, i.e. humans are mortal so something made them this way, or they done something to cause it. And this is part when on introduce tree/rock/whatever. Myth is explaining mortality.

God kicks them out of the garden, makes women have excruciating pain during childbirth and sanctions their husbands to rule over them, curses the ground, and makes people die as a result of sin. He does punish them and is kind of a jackass.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-05-2015, 06:27 AM (This post was last modified: 08-05-2015 06:33 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
(08-05-2015 06:21 AM)jennybee Wrote:  
(08-05-2015 06:06 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  You're right, though I think this interpretation makes slightly more sense than standard one. Also god isn't jackass in it, he does not punish Adam and Eve, so believers might find it better than one about sin.

As for the importance of choice I think it made sense, though not necessarily from modern perspective, i.e. humans are mortal so something made them this way, or they done something to cause it. And this is part when on introduce tree/rock/whatever. Myth is explaining mortality.

God kicks them out of the garden, makes women have excruciating pain during childbirth and sanctions their husbands to rule over them, curses the ground, and makes people die as a result of sin. He does punish them and is kind of a jackass.

He is but said interpretation ends at eating the fruit and becoming capable to giving life. There is no punishment, only mortality which is consequence of tasting fruit. Also there is no sin in this interpretation, for god supposedly planned on Adam and Eve eating from the tree.

Also if I recall corectly creation myth have at least two authors, so god in one author take could be quite nice guy, who jus can not manage to made humans fertile and immortal at the same time, so he make tree with magic fruit, and plan on Adam and Eve eating from it. Other author take could be vengeful god condemning first pair to suffering for sin. Final result is merging of these two tales - kind god who wanted the best for his creation suddenly starting punishing them for something that he know they were to do.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-05-2015, 06:31 AM
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
(08-05-2015 06:27 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(08-05-2015 06:21 AM)jennybee Wrote:  God kicks them out of the garden, makes women have excruciating pain during childbirth and sanctions their husbands to rule over them, curses the ground, and makes people die as a result of sin. He does punish them and is kind of a jackass.

He is but said interpretation ends at eating the fruit and becoming capable to giving life. There is no punishment, only mortality which is consequence of tasting fruit. Also there is no sin in this interpretation, for god supposedly planned on Adam and Eve eating from the tree.

In Genesis 3 God appears very pissed off. He punishes *all* women by making them go through painful childbirth and tells them they are to submit to their husbands for eating the fruit. Death is punishment for sin. That seems like a pretty big punishment for eating a piece of fruit...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-05-2015, 06:33 AM
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
I think the lesson here is God fails and don't trust talking snakes. There is so many thing's wrong with this whole forbidden fruit thing that's it's honestly not even worth thinking about. If God is true then he should have been able to make perfect humans, Eve should have never eaten that fruit, Satan should have never existed, Jesus would have never been crucified and Christianity would never have existed. Christianity existing is pretty much proof God does not exist.

"If you keep trying to better yourself that's enough for me. We don't decide which hand we are dealt in life, but we make the decision to play it or fold it" - Nishi Karano Kaze
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like JDog554's post
08-05-2015, 06:34 AM
RE: God doesn't understand iterative probability
(08-05-2015 06:33 AM)JDog554 Wrote:  I think the lesson here is God fails and don't trust talking snakes. There is so many thing's wrong with this whole forbidden fruit thing that's it's honestly not even worth thinking about. If God is true then he should have been able to make perfect humans, Eve should have never eaten that fruit, Satan should have never existed, Jesus would have never been crucified and Christianity would never have existed. Christianity existing is pretty much proof God does not exist.

Well said Bowing
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jennybee's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: