Author Topic: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?  (Read 1080 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1158
  • Darwins +82/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #29 on: February 03, 2014, 08:29:18 AM »
Ok. what is your question?

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #30 on: February 03, 2014, 08:53:02 AM »
Ok. what is your question?

??

I don't have one. I thought you had an issue you wanted to discuss and I just wanted to get either in reality mode or fantasy mode to answer it without flipping back and forth.

Regards
DL

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1158
  • Darwins +82/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #31 on: February 03, 2014, 09:07:32 AM »
sure.

Both have the same answer though.

In fantasy land god made the commandment with out a mens rea requirement. He says about the tree of life

Quote
thou shalt not eat of it:

Not "thou shalt not Knowingly eat of it" or "intentionally eat of it" or "dishonestly eat of it".

Just DO NOT DO IT.

Eve did. end of story.

where does it say in genesis that a guilty mind is an absolute requirement for a crime?

where does god say "and I shall be bound by the spirit of the law". Even if he did where is the spirit of the law defined?

You, in your OP, mix secular law and make-believe law in order to pose the question
Quote
Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?

and as I've said above, the answer to your question in both bibleland and reality is "no"

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #32 on: February 04, 2014, 09:11:44 AM »
Genesis calls what A & E did a sin.

To sin, when as immature as A & E were, not even bright enough to know they were naked, is impossible because to sin one must intend to and know that they are sinning.

Anything less would be an injustice.

Regards
DL

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1158
  • Darwins +82/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #33 on: February 05, 2014, 06:15:02 AM »
Genesis calls what A & E did a sin.

To sin, when as immature as A & E were, not even bright enough to know they were naked, is impossible because to sin one must intend to and know that they are sinning.

Anything less would be an injustice.

Regards
DL

Again, you don't need to know what you're doing is wrong it just has to be wrong. I'm sure you're aware of the phrase "ignorance of the law is no defence"


Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2442
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #34 on: February 05, 2014, 06:48:10 AM »
Genesis calls what A & E did a sin.

To sin, when as immature as A & E were, not even bright enough to know they were naked, is impossible because to sin one must intend to and know that they are sinning.

Anything less would be an injustice.

Regards
DL

Again, you don't need to know what you're doing is wrong it just has to be wrong. I'm sure you're aware of the phrase "ignorance of the law is no defence"

That's quite true but A and E were in a different position from that. It's not that they were ignorant of the law, its that they had no way of distinguishing right from wrong. The only way they could tell right from wrong was to eat the fruit that gave them that ability.  Therefore before eating the fruit, they had no way of knowing if doing something was bad.

I suppose it is more like a case where someone has some mental disability and can, be reason of that disability, not distinguish the fact that an action if wrong. the "ignorance of the law is no defence" applies to people who have knowledge of right and wrong but simply are caught out because they were unaware of a particular law. I think there is a big difference here and suspect that the courts would deal differently with such cases with the case with a mental disability being dealt with by some non-criminal means - send to a suitable care home perhaps.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1158
  • Darwins +82/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2014, 07:00:17 AM »
That's quite true but A and E were in a different position from that. It's not that they were ignorant of the law, its that they had no way of distinguishing right from wrong. The only way they could tell right from wrong was to eat the fruit that gave them that ability.  Therefore before eating the fruit, they had no way of knowing if doing something was bad.

I suppose it is more like a case where someone has some mental disability and can, be reason of that disability, not distinguish the fact that an action if wrong. the "ignorance of the law is no defence" applies to people who have knowledge of right and wrong but simply are caught out because they were unaware of a particular law. I think there is a big difference here and suspect that the courts would deal differently with such cases with the case with a mental disability being dealt with by some non-criminal means - send to a suitable care home perhaps.

What is the difference between someone who has no knowledge of right and wrong and no knowledge of a particular law? Are they in the same position regarding that particular law i.e. a position of ignorance as nether would know it was wrong?

True, whilst someone of impaired capacity may be dealt with by a non-criminal sentence they would still be guilty unless there was a defence of impaired capacity i.e. doli incapax. In the A&E case god chose to ignore any mitigating factors and gave them no scope for a defence and punished them accordingly.
I'm not saying it wasn't an ass hat thing to do but it was within the scope of his comandment

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #36 on: February 05, 2014, 10:06:12 AM »
Genesis calls what A & E did a sin.

To sin, when as immature as A & E were, not even bright enough to know they were naked, is impossible because to sin one must intend to and know that they are sinning.

Anything less would be an injustice.

Regards
DL

Again, you don't need to know what you're doing is wrong it just has to be wrong. I'm sure you're aware of the phrase "ignorance of the law is no defence"

Sure. If the law is understood.

If one does not have any knowledge of good and evil, one might be responsible for something but not culpable for the results.

If a baby is put on a bomb console and is told not to press a button and does and kills many, it is responsible but not culpable. That is what mens rea is all about.

Regards
DL

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1158
  • Darwins +82/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #37 on: February 05, 2014, 11:10:06 AM »
Sure. If the law is understood.

If one does not have any knowledge of good and evil, one might be responsible for something but not culpable for the results.

If a baby is put on a bomb console and is told not to press a button and does and kills many, it is responsible but not culpable. That is what mens rea is all about.

Regards
DL

Man, I don't know why you don't get that mens rea isn't always a requirement for culpability.

In the baby/bomb scenario the baby would be seen as a tool, no different from the bomb, rather than a perpetrator. The person who put the baby there would be culpable either through malice or recklessness.

However this scenario in no way relates to the A&E story. In the story A&E were humans capable of speech. Adam was commanded "name the animals". He named the animals and therefore must have understood a positive command and by implication would have understood a negative command.

Irrespective of whether E knew that it was wrong or not she disobeyed the command and was caught bang to rights.

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #38 on: February 05, 2014, 12:59:57 PM »
Eve, as scriptures say, was deceived.

In our scenario, that is like placing the baby on the console by Satan.

You agreed that the baby was not culpable and that the one that put it on the console was the one guilty by negligence.

We have basically identical situations yet you find on guilty and the other innocent.

I don't know where you want to go from here as you have set a double standard.

Regards
DL

Offline Betelnut

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 143
  • Darwins +13/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #39 on: February 05, 2014, 10:01:40 PM »
I've always thought of the story as a fable about humans acquiring a moral sense.  Before "eating of the apple," Adam and Eve were essentially like animals (amoral).  Afterwards, they had the sense of morality.

But...if they were amoral how can they be blamed (morally) for their actions?  Like a dog who as killed a person--sure it is "to blame" but it isn't aware of this.

That was why their punishment seems silly.

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #40 on: February 06, 2014, 02:14:13 PM »
I've always thought of the story as a fable about humans acquiring a moral sense.  Before "eating of the apple," Adam and Eve were essentially like animals (amoral).  Afterwards, they had the sense of morality.

But...if they were amoral how can they be blamed (morally) for their actions?  Like a dog who as killed a person--sure it is "to blame" but it isn't aware of this.

That was why their punishment seems silly.

I agree and see the Christian, then Catholic church going with the fall scenario instead of the Jewish elevation scenario for misogynistic reasons just as they wrote out Lilith.

Note how the Abraham cults have used this myth to bludgeon women into inequality forever.

And the secular state is quite slow to redress that crime against humanity.

Regards
DL

Offline wright

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1734
  • Darwins +72/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #41 on: February 06, 2014, 02:37:34 PM »
Note how the Abraham cults have used this myth to bludgeon women into inequality forever.

And the secular state is quite slow to redress that crime against humanity.

Regards
DL

"Slow" is a relative term. Can you give an example of a non-secular state that has been quicker to redress it than any secular one? AFAIK, secularism as we know it now only got started in the eighteenth century.

It wasn't until the middle class had started accumulating serious wealth and the upper classes realized that mechanized industry was making slavery unprofitable that secular power could oppose sectarian power. By historical standards, that wasn't very long ago.
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #42 on: February 06, 2014, 03:25:54 PM »
You are correct and it is relative but even in Canada, a progressive country, legislation is slow and our own government has to be taken to court by women to get their rights of equal pay for equal work. This has been ongoing for more than 40 years that I know of and I don't think of any government that has an across the board and fast track was to get redress. Right now the only ones being addressed or the larger unionized female workers. The rest are left to the inequality of the workplace.

Regards
DL

 

Offline wright

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1734
  • Darwins +72/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #43 on: February 06, 2014, 03:51:36 PM »
^^^Which was kinda my point. It took a very recent secular approach to even begin to address humanitarian ideals. While there have been religious sects that give lip service to gender equality (you can even cherry-pick some examples from the Bible), no sectarian power (AFAIK) has ever done so.

Religion is generally hierarchical, which means that the elites of a given culture can easily use it to enforce the status quo. Historically, that's meant disenfranchising women. Modern secularism and the general improvement of the human condition is a recent development; there are reactionary forces that would happily reverse it.
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #44 on: February 06, 2014, 06:58:44 PM »
True but methinks the chances are near nil.

Let us pray.

Regards
DL

Offline wright

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1734
  • Darwins +72/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #45 on: February 06, 2014, 07:12:04 PM »
^^^Depends on which country / culture we're talking about. The women of Iran certainly saw terrifying reverses after the 1979 Revolution, as have women in other Mid-East countries. Even in the US there's pressure from conservative reactionaries to roll back or severely curtail women's rights, with regard to abortion and family planning in particular.

That said, I agree it's unlikely. But unlikely is not the same as impossible.

Let us pray.

Regards
DL

It would be more productive to actually do something: write legislators to get them to support gender equality, for instance.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2014, 07:14:31 PM by wright »
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #46 on: February 06, 2014, 07:36:32 PM »
That is basically what I meant but it is the majority stopping progress and those are the ones who supposedly pray all the time and the right way.

Regards
DL

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1158
  • Darwins +82/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #47 on: February 12, 2014, 11:34:07 AM »
Eve, as scriptures say, was deceived.

In our scenario, that is like placing the baby on the console by Satan.

You agreed that the baby was not culpable and that the one that put it on the console was the one guilty by negligence.

We have basically identical situations yet you find on guilty and the other innocent.

Its hardly the same. Would you say that the baby had been deceived into pressing the button?
For someone to be deceived they must be capable of being deceived.

If you say eve is like the baby, in reality no different from an automaton, then there can be no question of assigning guilt rendering your OP pointless.
Is the gun used in a suicide guilty of murder? Of course not it is just a tool.
Why are you arguing a mens rea defence for something that is amoral?
 
I don't know where you want to go from here as you have set a double standard.

Regards
DL

I don't see the double standard. I see two different scenarios which you are doing your best to conflate in order to argue a stand point which you in your attempt to explain have rendered moot.

Offline Tonus

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
  • Darwins +28/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
    • Stuff I draw
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #48 on: February 12, 2014, 01:46:12 PM »
The problem with answering this (for me, at least) is that as you work your way through the story you realize just how poorly-written it is.  Too many details are left out and over the centuries the gaps in the story have been filled by one convenient interpretation after another (perhaps starting with Paul, when he claimed that Eve had been deceived, but not Adam).

God only informs Adam that if he eats from the tree, he will die.  Presumably, either Adam or god repeated this warning to Eve.  We must also assume that Adam and Eve understood the concept of death, otherwise the warning had little power to motivate.  It is important to remember that this rule (or law, or stipulation, etc) only established one moral boundary: obedience to god.  There is nothing inherently good or bad in eating the fruit from a tree.  The penalty was for disobeying god.

Thus, when the serpent tells Eve that eating from the tree will allow her to "become like god, knowing good and bad" he is introducing a new element for the reader; moral (good/bad) behavior.  We might assume that Eve understood the basics of good vs evil or moral/immoral behavior, since she does not question the serpent's statement.  We must also assume that Eve understands that god is withholding this knowledge from her and that she sees that as a bad thing, because the serpent's words make the fruit (ie, the opportunity to know what god knows about good and evil) desirable.  But since she didn't have knowledge of good and bad, she must have AHHHH PARADOX CAUSING A LOGIC CRAMP IN MY BRAINNNNN

In other words, whether or not we accept that Eve was under outside influence or not, we run into a roadblock when we try to determine knowledge or intent.  If Eve did not understand good from evil, and therefore had no moral standard to rely on, then she's innocent by reason of inanity. :p

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #49 on: February 12, 2014, 02:46:25 PM »
Eve, as scriptures say, was deceived.

In our scenario, that is like placing the baby on the console by Satan.

You agreed that the baby was not culpable and that the one that put it on the console was the one guilty by negligence.

We have basically identical situations yet you find on guilty and the other innocent.

Its hardly the same. Would you say that the baby had been deceived into pressing the button?
For someone to be deceived they must be capable of being deceived.

If you say eve is like the baby, in reality no different from an automaton, then there can be no question of assigning guilt rendering your OP pointless.
Is the gun used in a suicide guilty of murder? Of course not it is just a tool.
Why are you arguing a mens rea defence for something that is amoral?
 
I don't know where you want to go from here as you have set a double standard.

Regards
DL

I don't see the double standard. I see two different scenarios which you are doing your best to conflate in order to argue a stand point which you in your attempt to explain have rendered moot.

A baby does not know it is doing evil and thus mens rea is met as it does not have an evil intent or evil mind.

An adult/Eve, who is deceived, in this case, not knowing the button is deadly, also meets mens rea because she did not have an evil intent or evil mind.

The deceiver would be assigned all guilt as that would be the only mind that had evil intent.

The scenarios are exact. Good buy.

Regards
DL


Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #50 on: February 12, 2014, 02:51:06 PM »
^^ The gun used to kill someone would also qualify for mens rea, by the same reasoning.  True, but trivial.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #51 on: February 12, 2014, 02:54:40 PM »
The problem with answering this (for me, at least) is that as you work your way through the story you realize just how poorly-written it is.  Too many details are left out and over the centuries the gaps in the story have been filled by one convenient interpretation after another (perhaps starting with Paul, when he claimed that Eve had been deceived, but not Adam).

God only informs Adam that if he eats from the tree, he will die.  Presumably, either Adam or god repeated this warning to Eve.  We must also assume that Adam and Eve understood the concept of death, otherwise the warning had little power to motivate.  It is important to remember that this rule (or law, or stipulation, etc) only established one moral boundary: obedience to god.  There is nothing inherently good or bad in eating the fruit from a tree.  The penalty was for disobeying god.

Thus, when the serpent tells Eve that eating from the tree will allow her to "become like god, knowing good and bad" he is introducing a new element for the reader; moral (good/bad) behavior.  We might assume that Eve understood the basics of good vs evil or moral/immoral behavior, since she does not question the serpent's statement.  We must also assume that Eve understands that god is withholding this knowledge from her and that she sees that as a bad thing, because the serpent's words make the fruit (ie, the opportunity to know what god knows about good and evil) desirable.  But since she didn't have knowledge of good and bad, she must have AHHHH PARADOX CAUSING A LOGIC CRAMP IN MY BRAINNNNN

In other words, whether or not we accept that Eve was under outside influence or not, we run into a roadblock when we try to determine knowledge or intent.  If Eve did not understand good from evil, and therefore had no moral standard to rely on, then she's innocent by reason of inanity. :p

Not insanity perhaps. Just innocence. Like a baby who doe not know it is naked.

"But since she didn't have knowledge of good and bad, she must have AHHHH PARADOX CAUSING A LOGIC CRAMP IN MY BRAINNNNN"

I am pleased that there because I was beginning to scratch my head as to how I was going to answer.

I agree that the Christian reading of Eden makes no sense. The Jewish way does. Eden to them was our elevation and not our fall.

As a Gnostic Christian, I think that it is literal reading that will kill the Catholic and Christian religions and that Gnostic Christianity, the thinking man's religion will take over.

Regards
DL

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #52 on: February 12, 2014, 02:59:59 PM »
^^ The gun used to kill someone would also qualify for mens rea, by the same reasoning.  True, but trivial.

Not true. A gun cannot be questioned to determine if it knew what it was doing or not.

It would be fun to hear a lawyer trying to question it though.

All he would get in reply would be -----



Regards
DL



Offline Tonus

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
  • Darwins +28/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
    • Stuff I draw
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #53 on: February 12, 2014, 04:16:29 PM »
Not insanity perhaps. Just innocence. Like a baby who doe not know it is naked.
No, I said "inanity."  The insanity defense would have to be applied in a very novel way.  We would not be excusing Eve on account of her being insane, but because the whole scenario was insane. :)

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #54 on: February 12, 2014, 04:43:19 PM »
Read the Christian way and in the way you state it, I agree.
Forgive my first. I read too quickly.

Here is the right Jewish way to read Eden in case you are not aware of it.

As a Gnostic Christian, this is how I read it.

http://www.mrrena.com/misc/judaism2.php

Regards
DL


Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #55 on: February 12, 2014, 05:02:53 PM »
Not true. A gun cannot be questioned to determine if it knew what it was doing or not.

Actually it can be questioned to determine that.  If the gun responds to the question by showing evidence of mindlessness, then that is valid information and answers the question of whether it knew what it was doing or not.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1158
  • Darwins +82/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #56 on: February 13, 2014, 06:10:14 AM »

A baby does not know it is doing evil and thus mens rea is met as it does not have an evil intent or evil mind.

Lets just clear this point up. if the mens rea element of an offence is met then the crime is complete and guilt can be assigned. I'm beginning to think that you don't know what you're talking about...


An adult/Eve, who is deceived, in this case, not knowing the button is deadly, also meets mens rea because she did not have an evil intent or evil mind.

As stated, at length, mens rea is not always necessary.

Tell me where you can find the mens rea requirement in the commandment.

I'll help you.

Quote
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

I've bolded the actus reus. The mens rea will be in the rest of the commandment if it is there.
Hint: the bit in italics is the penalty

Before you start banging on about the "spirit" of the law requiring mens rea I'll point out that your wrong (again, see strict liability).
If there is any "spirit" of the law it is the rebuttable presumption of innocence. This is referred to as the Golden Thread.
I've bolded the important bit of the "spirit" of the law for you.

Show me where, in any jurisdiction, the mens rea requirement is absolute.

The deceiver would be assigned all guilt as that would be the only mind that had evil intent.
The scenarios are exact.

Lets consider this for a moment.

Your primary question seems to be "Was the act a voluntary act?"
You are saying not as eve was deceived/incapable of forming mens rea.

You compare this to what is clearly an involuntary act of a baby accidentally pressing a button.

Eve had to go to the tree, pick a fruit from the tree and then eat the fruit.

Are you saying this is the same as a baby randomly waving it's limbs?

There are 2 possible answers

  • Yes, eve was acting involuntarily. Being fully formed but incapable of voluntary action would render eve an automaton. Therefore intent is irrelevant. Your OP is moot.
  • No, eve was acting voluntarily (but as you argue) under outside influence. Where in the commandment is the mens rea requirement? If it is not there your OP is moot. 

Funnily enough eve then goes on to influence adam. If we take your staring point of innocence lost then by influencing the edens very own himbo doesn't eve then take the role of deceiver and in your own words;
Quote
The deceiver would be assigned all guilt
Was eve kicked out of paradise for eating the fruit or for, with knowledge aforethought, persuading adam to eat it thereby committing the same offence[1]


Good buy.

Regards
DL

No, it isn't a good buy as I haven't bought it.




 1.  in English law at least - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/24-25/94/crossheading/as-to-abettors-in-misdemeanors

Offline Greatest I am

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
  • Darwins +9/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does being under supernatural control exonerate Eve of any sin?
« Reply #57 on: February 13, 2014, 01:05:15 PM »
First. Just picked up this new tune that I will pass on to Christians after I put an O P together.



What do you think of it?

--------------------------------

"Funnily enough eve then goes on to influence adam. If we take your staring point of innocence lost then by influencing the edens very own himbo doesn't eve then take the role of deceiver and in your own words;"

 
Consider. Eve was innocent and rather dumb. Too dumb to even realize she was naked. Her instincts wisely made her eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and that gives her the moral sense of a God and that is knowledge of almost everything as everything is subject to good and evil. Her human instincts and the knowledge that God has is now hers making her superior to God who does not have human instincts.

Eve did as scriptures urge all to do.

Matthew 5:48
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

She has become as one of us God said.

All good.

What is Eve guilty of exactly. What harm was done. All evil and sin does harm. Right?

Regards
DL