Author Topic: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".  (Read 1413 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
  • Darwins +58/-14
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #29 on: July 15, 2014, 01:33:53 PM »
And if the kid eats the cookies, he gets tossed out of the home forever.

Don't forget, the grandkids also gets punished, and the great-grandkids, and every generations after that.

All for a couple of cookies.

Yep grandparents usually are willing to deal with the grandkids even when estranged from the parents.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12338
  • Darwins +677/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #30 on: July 15, 2014, 01:35:11 PM »

it's the same reason a parent tells the child "no cookies before dinner" yet leaves the cookies on the kitchen counter. The parent wants the child to refuse the cookies on his/her own.

It's not.  The point of telling kids "no cookies for dinner" is not out of discipline.  It is so they eat the more nutritionally balanced food instead of the junk.  I don't know any parents who then leave the cookies where the kids can get them unless the kids are at least 8 or 9 years old and have had years to develop and work on their impulse control.  Kids have terrible impules control, so leaving the cookies where they can get them is setting them up for failure.

Which gets back to my point (which you've repeatedly dodged) - why not start off E&A with an easier exercise that does not have such drastic consequences?


Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2744
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #31 on: July 15, 2014, 01:46:26 PM »
In the context of paradise, what need is there for "self-control and discipline"?

I'm still waiting for Skeptic to answer this.

On the same note, Skeptic talked about "willpower" and "being impressed"in reply 20, and again in reply 23.


In the context of a perfect, sin-free paradise, what need is there for any of this? 

When everything is perfect...

When every one of your basic need is met...

When there's only one other person beside you...

When "sin" does not yet exist...

When you have no concept of "sin"...

What need is there for any of the stuff Skeptic mentioned?
« Last Edit: July 15, 2014, 01:49:36 PM by Aaron123 »
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1594
  • Darwins +28/-109
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #32 on: July 15, 2014, 01:57:50 PM »
Perhaps this has been brought up before and, if it has, I apologize.

I was discussing scripture with my mother-in-law over the weekend because it is fun to watch her mental gymnastics and I hit upon a question she couldn't answer.  My question is predicated on the general theist view that God was the first cause creator.

Did god want Adam and Eve to eat the fruit?

If he did, they were simply fulfilling his divine plan.  However, if he didn't, why then did he create it so that "the tree was beautiful and its fruit looked delicious".  Why not a spiny fruit that smelled bad?

No he didn't want them to eat the fruit.  That's why he commanded them to not eat it.  Further, if the fruit had been unappealing it would not have been a genuine test.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2744
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #33 on: July 15, 2014, 02:06:08 PM »
No he didn't want them to eat the fruit.  That's why he commanded them to not eat it.  Further, if the fruit had been unappealing it would not have been a genuine test.

Why does an omnipotent being need to "test" lesser creatures?
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
  • Darwins +58/-14
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #34 on: July 15, 2014, 02:11:46 PM »
In the context of paradise, what need is there for "self-control and discipline"?

I'm still waiting for Skeptic to answer this.

On the same note, Skeptic talked about "willpower" and "being impressed"in reply 20, and again in reply 23.


In the context of a perfect, sin-free paradise, what need is there for any of this? 

When everything is perfect...

When every one of your basic need is met...

When there's only one other person beside you...

When "sin" does not yet exist...

When you have no concept of "sin"...

What need is there for any of the stuff Skeptic mentioned?


Wow in essence Adam was an undiciplined spoiled child that was suddenly thrust into a situation where self control was required with dire consequences.


At best Adam was guilty of petty theft.  As a first time offender I doubt he would do 30 days:)

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
  • Darwins +58/-14
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #35 on: July 15, 2014, 02:18:44 PM »
No he didn't want them to eat the fruit.  That's why he commanded them to not eat it.  Further, if the fruit had been unappealing it would not have been a genuine test.

Why does an omnipotent being need to "test" lesser creatures?

interesting as well.   First off he knows the test will be failed so the test is irrelevant.  The Eden experiment is like be covering a gerbil with gasoline and lighting him on fire as an experiment.  I know the result so the test is just mean.  I wonder what will happen if I drive over a frog with my car?  Hmmm, it died.  I wonder if I drove over another frog what will happen?  Hmmm, it died.

Hmm I think I will make a human, spoil him, not teach him any dicipline, give him an arbitrary rule to follow regarding an attractive nuisance, allow someone evil to live in his midst and lie to him.  I wonder what will happen?

DagNabIt who would have guessed he might choose unwisely.  Well now I am pissed I am going to kick him out and let him suffer and die and I will not offer any reprieve to his children or their children.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2014, 02:21:53 PM by epidemic »

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1594
  • Darwins +28/-109
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #36 on: July 15, 2014, 02:32:12 PM »
No he didn't want them to eat the fruit.  That's why he commanded them to not eat it.  Further, if the fruit had been unappealing it would not have been a genuine test.

Why does an omnipotent being need to "test" lesser creatures?

Obviously not for his own benefit.  There must be another benefit then.  Perhaps you can think of some possibilities.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6465
  • Darwins +769/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #37 on: July 15, 2014, 02:34:38 PM »
He didn't want them to eat it, but he knew they would, because he's omnipotent.

He didn't want them to eat the fruit, but he put only minimal effort into telling the kids what not to do. Presumably because he knew they would eat it anyway, and he wanted them to eat it, all of which means he's a sadist. 

As others have already said, they didn't know the meaning of 'right and wrong' because they hadn't eaten of the fruit yet. And they had no idea what 'death' was, because it didn't exist in the garden. How could they possibly have a made a sound judgment? And how could they have known that the judgment would affect not only them, but everyone to follow, given that they hadn't whipped out any kids yet, so they weren't real clear on things like generations and such.

Not knowing diddly about something makes it hard to make sound, mature and correct decisions about anything. Let alone something the negatively affects the fate of all humanity.

As being who evolved from other creatures, we have no particular reason to do only the 'right' thing. Most of our concepts about right and wrong are human inventions, mostly because we like to complain about folks that aren't like us. But there are genetically ingrained rights and wrongs, as evidence by bear mothers slapping their cubs for minor transgressions. So we have both inherited and social meanings for what is right and wrong, and of course it is occasionally going to be a big deal when we disagree with someone else on any given subject. But simplistic stories that boil the whole thing down to one bad decision by two humans who presumably had no genetic predispositions, because their genes had just been invented by the very guy who was going to make/allow things to go sour a little later.

The story is so simplistic, so naïve, so implausible, so inconsiderate, so selfish, so intolerant, so unlikely and so stupid that a person has to be religious to believe it because no other human condition (save actual brain damage) could allow a person to swallow it.

The religious that accept an old planet and consider stories like Eden and the flood to be allegorical or whatever at least have enough brain cells to try matching observed reality with their favorite story. Fundy's don't bother. Apparently their book is so important to them that they feel no need to match it with the observable universe.

Oh, and they love being guilty and it not being their fault. Wimps.
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12338
  • Darwins +677/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #38 on: July 15, 2014, 02:40:03 PM »
You know, I hear tell the jews don't look at the Fall the same way the xians do.  They celebrate it as the moment E&A came into the fullness of their humanity.  Because the ability to make moral judgments is something animals cannot do.[1]  So this "betrayal" was really sort of  birthright and a necessary final step in making people.  However, the whole part about making life shitty and killing them still leaves me scratching my head...
 1. actually, they kind of can, at least when it comes to fairness, in some cases
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline stuffin

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
  • Darwins +26/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #39 on: July 15, 2014, 02:55:09 PM »
Perhaps this has been brought up before and, if it has, I apologize.

I was discussing scripture with my mother-in-law over the weekend because it is fun to watch her mental gymnastics and I hit upon a question she couldn't answer.  My question is predicated on the general theist view that God was the first cause creator.

Did god want Adam and Eve to eat the fruit?

If he did, they were simply fulfilling his divine plan.  However, if he didn't, why then did he create it so that "the tree was beautiful and its fruit looked delicious".  Why not a spiny fruit that smelled bad?

No he didn't want them to eat the fruit.  That's why he commanded them to not eat it.  Further, if the fruit had been unappealing it would not have been a genuine test.

YOU WOULD THINK GOD WOULD ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER TO THE TEST, RIGHT?
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1594
  • Darwins +28/-109
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #40 on: July 15, 2014, 03:02:14 PM »
Perhaps this has been brought up before and, if it has, I apologize.

I was discussing scripture with my mother-in-law over the weekend because it is fun to watch her mental gymnastics and I hit upon a question she couldn't answer.  My question is predicated on the general theist view that God was the first cause creator.

Did god want Adam and Eve to eat the fruit?

If he did, they were simply fulfilling his divine plan.  However, if he didn't, why then did he create it so that "the tree was beautiful and its fruit looked delicious".  Why not a spiny fruit that smelled bad?

No he didn't want them to eat the fruit.  That's why he commanded them to not eat it.  Further, if the fruit had been unappealing it would not have been a genuine test.

YOU WOULD THINK GOD WOULD ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER TO THE TEST, RIGHT?

I already made reply #36 in reference to this.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline dloubet

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1398
  • Darwins +79/-1
  • Gender: Male
    • Denisloubet.com
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #41 on: July 15, 2014, 03:07:22 PM »
Yeah, but you didn't actually answer it.
Denis Loubet

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6465
  • Darwins +769/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #42 on: July 15, 2014, 03:22:12 PM »
If A&E were tested when they were too naïve to respond correctly, then the original sin was putting the tree there in the first place.

God should be the one going to hell for all of eternity.

Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1594
  • Darwins +28/-109
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #43 on: July 15, 2014, 03:25:15 PM »
Yeah, but you didn't actually answer it.

No I didn't.  People should be willing to think and reason for themselves.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1594
  • Darwins +28/-109
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #44 on: July 15, 2014, 03:31:01 PM »
If A&E were tested when they were too naïve to respond correctly, then the original sin was putting the tree there in the first place.

God should be the one going to hell for all of eternity.

I'm aware that's your opinion but your reasoning is nothing but assumption.

Your first assumption seems to be that the point of the test was to test their knowledge of good and evil so that their knowledge of it becomes relevant.  The test was not one of over their knowledge of good and evil so their actual knowledge of it is irrelevant.

The test was a test of the trust and love of Jehovah.  In this regard even untrusting animals with no knowledge of good and evil are able to love and trust.  Therefore so could have Adam and Eve.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6465
  • Darwins +769/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #45 on: July 15, 2014, 03:38:03 PM »
Yeah, but you didn't actually answer it.

No I didn't.  People should be willing to think and reason for themselves.

Having thought and reasoned that it didn't happen in the first place, giving it additional thought is unnecessary.
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6465
  • Darwins +769/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #46 on: July 15, 2014, 03:42:34 PM »
If A&E were tested when they were too naïve to respond correctly, then the original sin was putting the tree there in the first place.

God should be the one going to hell for all of eternity.

I'm aware that's your opinion but your reasoning is nothing but assumption.

Your first assumption seems to be that the point of the test was to test their knowledge of good and evil so that their knowledge of it becomes relevant.  The test was not one of over their knowledge of good and evil so their actual knowledge of it is irrelevant.

The test was a test of the trust and love of Jehovah.  In this regard even untrusting animals with no knowledge of good and evil are able to love and trust.  Therefore so could have Adam and Eve.

No, the actual point of the whole story was to explain via oversimplification the presence of 'evil' in the world. Lacking psychological knowledge on the issue, and wanting to concentrate power in their own hands anyway, storytellers made this silly tale up. Incredibly, some people still believe it today. I've no idea why. Well, I guess wanting everything to be simple and understandable by making up every single thing about the world and ignoring that which is real has appeal to some, but again, I've no idea why.
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1594
  • Darwins +28/-109
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #47 on: July 15, 2014, 03:57:52 PM »
If A&E were tested when they were too naïve to respond correctly, then the original sin was putting the tree there in the first place.

God should be the one going to hell for all of eternity.

I'm aware that's your opinion but your reasoning is nothing but assumption.

Your first assumption seems to be that the point of the test was to test their knowledge of good and evil so that their knowledge of it becomes relevant.  The test was not one of over their knowledge of good and evil so their actual knowledge of it is irrelevant.

The test was a test of the trust and love of Jehovah.  In this regard even untrusting animals with no knowledge of good and evil are able to love and trust.  Therefore so could have Adam and Eve.

No, the actual point of the whole story was to explain via oversimplification the presence of 'evil' in the world. Lacking psychological knowledge on the issue, and wanting to concentrate power in their own hands anyway, storytellers made this silly tale up. Incredibly, some people still believe it today. I've no idea why. Well, I guess wanting everything to be simple and understandable by making up every single thing about the world and ignoring that which is real has appeal to some, but again, I've no idea why.

Yes, but the "evil" is a lack of trust (faith) in Jehovah.  Remember that Abraham was declared righteous not by following a law but by trusting Jehovah.  Trusting Jehovah is good and not trusting Jehovah is bad.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline ButterFlavoredPam

Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #48 on: July 15, 2014, 03:58:38 PM »
The Eden experiment is like be covering a gerbil with gasoline and lighting him on fire as an experiment.  I know the result so the test is just mean.  I wonder what will happen if I drive over a frog with my car?  Hmmm, it died.  I wonder if I drove over another frog what will happen?  Hmmm, it died.

EXCELLENT analogy!
“In dark ages people are best guided by religion, as in a pitch-black night a blind man is the best guide; he knows the roads and paths better than a man who can see. When daylight comes, however, it is foolish to use blind, old men as guides.”
 Heinrich Heine

Offline YRM_DM

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #49 on: July 15, 2014, 04:32:24 PM »
No he didn't want them to eat the fruit.  That's why he commanded them to not eat it.  Further, if the fruit had been unappealing it would not have been a genuine test.

Why does an omnipotent being need to "test" lesser creatures?

Obviously not for his own benefit.  There must be another benefit then.  Perhaps you can think of some possibilities.

Let me rack my brain here... 

So god created the heavens and the earth, proportionally so there'd be one earth and a few hundred thousand billion other stars and planets to light up our sky.

God created all his angels but then one of them got too proud so god cast him down to the earth, and he is satan.

God had already created heaven, but, he created a garden just exactly like heaven and then put a man and woman in it to do whatever they want.

God had a tree with fruit that would give knowledge on it, told them not to eat it, and then stuck it right in the middle of the garden and left for a while so he wouldn't know what they were doing.

Satan transformed into a snake and formed audible words to Eve... "hey sweetie... this tree over here will give you knowledge and we all know that religions don't want their followers to have any of that, so, give it a shot baby"

Eve ate the fruit, gave some to Adam.  God came down, acted surprised that his next creations instantly turned on him too, and cursed Eve with crippling pains of childbirth and put all kinds of pain and disease on earth...

Then for the next few thousand years, god let billions of people suffer on purpose for an experiment that he knew would fail.

Good reasons... good reasons... hrm...

I still don't have any.   You?

You can't spell BELIEVE without LIE...  and a few other letters.  B and E and V and I think E.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6465
  • Darwins +769/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #50 on: July 15, 2014, 04:49:24 PM »
Yes, but the "evil" is a lack of trust (faith) in Jehovah.  Remember that Abraham was declared righteous not by following a law but by trusting Jehovah.  Trusting Jehovah is good and not trusting Jehovah is bad.

I haven't trusted jehovah for over half a century and I'm doing just fine. I know, I know, you're gonna threaten me with both a lousy Internet connection and eternal damnation in the hereafter because of this, but I don't think so. With no evidence whatsoever that there ever was or will be a god of any variety, I will assume that death is exactly that. Death. But if it isn't, and I am condemned to spend eternity burning, etc. at least I'll be the same place all my relatives and most of my friends will end up, because your story is so uncompelling that there just aren't many of us doing exactly right, as per your religious beliefs.

If my sweet little old grandmother can spend eternity in hell because god loves us, I can too.

(By the way, the notion of eternal suffering is so human a threat that it could only come from the mouths of the religious. Nobody else is so hung up on love, etc. to come up with such a ridiculous and threatening notion. Funny how the religious, so righteous and so loving, can giggle over an eternity in hell. Could it be that there is no real love in christianity, only faux love. And that you guys don't even know what real love is? Me thinks that's the case.)
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12338
  • Darwins +677/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #51 on: July 16, 2014, 08:17:43 AM »
The test was not one of over their knowledge of good and evil so their actual knowledge of it is irrelevant.

If trust= good and no trust = evil, as you have equated, then yes, it is relevant. 

In this regard even untrusting animals with no knowledge of good and evil are able to love and trust.

On what do you base this statement?  What animals were loving or trusting?

Therefore so could have Adam and Eve.

You are comparing A&E to animals.  Is it not one of the central ideas of judeo-xian thought that humans and animals are qualitatively different?



Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4173
  • Darwins +17/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #52 on: July 16, 2014, 08:22:39 AM »
God loved to test people didn't he? Then he gets all angry when they fail and punishes them, sometimes for an eternity. Not sure if I like such a god, he never even gave A& a chance to repent. Surely he had an antidote to the forbidden fruit, right? "Eat this, it will remove the effects of the other". Nah, guess he didn't think ahead or was just a spiteful fella.
If you are following God why can I still see you?

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
  • Darwins +58/-14
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #53 on: July 16, 2014, 08:44:11 AM »
God loved to test people didn't he? Then he gets all angry when they fail and punishes them, sometimes for an eternity. Not sure if I like such a god, he never even gave A& a chance to repent. Surely he had an antidote to the forbidden fruit, right? "Eat this, it will remove the effects of the other". Nah, guess he didn't think ahead or was just a spiteful fella.

I used to think that the Noah story is the most un-believable story in the bible but adam and eve really is right up there.

My list of personal proofs that the bible is absolutely can not to represent the history humanity or indicate the wishes and will of an omnipotent omnicient god just keeps growing. 

I don't know what the root cause for the big bang was but I don't think I can find any answers in the Koran, Torrah, or Bible.  If there is a god who spawned the universe I have not found any book that can reasonbly describe God or his will.  In the absence of any evidence to the contrary I will continue to believe the universe has some mysterious (possibly unknowable) natural cause.

Offline Willie

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 646
  • Darwins +74/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #54 on: July 16, 2014, 10:04:33 AM »
The tree is metaphor, as is the garden. The bible states outright what the tree is a metaphor of: the knowledge of good and evil. The mind-poisoning message of the story is this: Turn off your inner moral compass. Discontinue your pursuit of knowledge. Morality is whatever the book tells you it is. Truth is whatever the book tells you it is. Questioning this will be severely punished. Blindly following leads to paradise. Just believe and do as you're told.

The story is a tool for attaining compliance. A tool for attaining power.

When jstwebbrowsing said this:

Your first assumption seems to be that the point of the test was to test their knowledge of good and evil so that their knowledge of it becomes relevant.  The test was not one of over their knowledge of good and evil so their actual knowledge of it is irrelevant.

The test was a test of the trust and love of Jehovah.  In this regard even untrusting animals with no knowledge of good and evil are able to love and trust.  Therefore so could have Adam and Eve.

and then this:

Yes, but the "evil" is a lack of trust (faith) in Jehovah.  Remember that Abraham was declared righteous not by following a law but by trusting Jehovah.  Trusting Jehovah is good and not trusting Jehovah is bad.

he had it exactly right. He's too caught up in the indoctrination to see how manipulative and evil those ideas are, but his clear expression of them shows that the story has achieved in him exactly the effect that it was designed to achieve.


Offline YRM_DM

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #55 on: July 16, 2014, 10:29:01 AM »
The tree is metaphor, as is the garden. The bible states outright what the tree is a metaphor of: the knowledge of good and evil. The mind-poisoning message of the story is this: Turn off your inner moral compass. Discontinue your pursuit of knowledge. Morality is whatever the book tells you it is. Truth is whatever the book tells you it is. Questioning this will be severely punished. Blindly following leads to paradise. Just believe and do as you're told.

The story is a tool for attaining compliance. A tool for attaining power.

When jstwebbrowsing said this:

Your first assumption seems to be that the point of the test was to test their knowledge of good and evil so that their knowledge of it becomes relevant.  The test was not one of over their knowledge of good and evil so their actual knowledge of it is irrelevant.

The test was a test of the trust and love of Jehovah.  In this regard even untrusting animals with no knowledge of good and evil are able to love and trust.  Therefore so could have Adam and Eve.

and then this:

Yes, but the "evil" is a lack of trust (faith) in Jehovah.  Remember that Abraham was declared righteous not by following a law but by trusting Jehovah.  Trusting Jehovah is good and not trusting Jehovah is bad.

he had it exactly right. He's too caught up in the indoctrination to see how manipulative and evil those ideas are, but his clear expression of them shows that the story has achieved in him exactly the effect that it was designed to achieve.


Yep...

- Your blessed if you are persecuted for your beliefs.
- If you try to reach someone, and they refuse your message, you're taught to wipe the dust from your sandals and move on.
- Doubting Thomas is a story of a reasonable man who had reasonable doubts, but he's the "bad guy" in the story... the example that you should not follow.   "Blessed are they who have not seen, but still believe."
- Job questions God for letting his family, servants, possessions and health all be destroyed horribly, and God chews him out for daring to question.
- Lot is forgiven for things like offering up his daughters to be raped, but Lot's wife is incinerated and turned into a pillar of salt for "wondering" what was happening to the city behind her.   Her sin was not having faith and "being curious"

You're taught not to question, to just have faith... and if you HAVE questions, it's (sort of) ok but you need to get answers from The Bible while guided by someone trained in apologizing for the Bible.

If you question the validity of the Bible, you're supposed to test it by reading other parts of the Bible.   If you read all this and come up to logical conclusions that it's all garbage, then religion teaches that you're deceived by satan.

So you could be a christian, reading the Bible, and question stuff... and you're literally worried.  You're thinking, "Please god, please jesus, let me understand the wisdom of your word and not be deceived by satan."

You're literally begging in prayer not to doubt the holy spirit, even though it's completely delusional.

I remember asking church leaders if I'd ever somehow blasphemed against the holy spirit by accident at some point... you're literally threatened on fear of eternal torture NOT to investigate how religion is all utter crap.

I think this is a big reason why non-believers are so offended by it.
You can't spell BELIEVE without LIE...  and a few other letters.  B and E and V and I think E.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12338
  • Darwins +677/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #56 on: July 16, 2014, 10:44:06 AM »
The tree is metaphor, as is the garden. The bible states outright what the tree is a metaphor of: the knowledge of good and evil.

interesting fact: it was also the symbol of the goddess asherah, whose other symbols - the serpent - gave widsom primarily to women and the tree of life.  Given that, the eden story is a political attack on a rival cult and a polemic against non-patriarchal traditions.

http://www.asphodel-long.com/html/asherah.html
http://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/asherahasherim-bible
some other good research done at JW net http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/73244/1/The-Tree-of-Life-Asherah-and-Her-Snakes
http://thequeenofheaven.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/asherah-part-i-the-lost-bride-of-yahweh/  <--really good one. Describes early hebrew religion as a stew of paganism and polytheism. 3 parts to it.

this one is in powerpoint format: http://www.academia.edu/5243501/Yahwehs_Divorce_The_Hidden_Goddess_in_the_Garden_of_Eden




Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
  • Darwins +58/-14
Re: A question about Adam, Eve, and the "apple".
« Reply #57 on: July 16, 2014, 12:17:31 PM »
- Lot is forgiven for things like offering up his daughters to be raped, but Lot's wife is incinerated and turned into a pillar of salt or "wondering" what was happening to the city behind her.   Her sin was not having faith and "being curious"


Does the bible ever indicate that Lot offering up his daughters was offensive or a sin?