What if Eve had not eaten the apple?

[Cris]

Okconnor,

God is beyond any mans' comprehension.

That is the quintessential agnostic position.

Our ability to comprehend the universe and everything in it and outside of it is limited.

But not inherently. Our current limits are a result of our current degree of evolution. As we continue to evolve and grow our intelligence then the limits to our understanding and knowledge will decrease.

Our ability to understand why we are here, and how, is limited.

Same reasoning as above.

 

[Alex1]

Adam and Eve's disobedience was meant to happen. It was part of God's plan. Without eating the fruit, they would have been unable to procreate and would have remained in the Garden of Eden, unfulfilled and alone.

If god knew it would happen then why do it in the first place? Create man he knew was doomed? Your god isnt very loveing, and even if god is loveing that is a human charactoristic, meaning god isnt perfect or know all, thats why I dont believe in god or adam and eve

 

[Vindicator]

Anyone can find out easily enough. But what they'll find are doctrines that are antithetical to one another, so much so that one would think there were as many gods as there were religions; tens of thousands, in fact.

True, but it all depends on the claims each make. I think some are more in line with rationality than others.

And as I mentioned, there are tens of thousands of religions in the world, all with varying descriptions of their gods. That certainly does not serve as credit towards a single god, does it?

Clearly you exxagerate with the number of world religions... at least the major ones.

If you define every single variation of the continuum as a separate religion then you'll end up with as many religions as there are religious people and a redundant statement.

As a basic way of looking at it: without religions would anyone have considered "God"? I would consider the negative answer to that credit enough.

If that were the case, we would all see him, be able to talk with him, and most importanty, there would be only one religion and one god to ALL people in the world. Clearly god is NOT within the realm of reality.

You seem to misunderstand me; if God exists then God is clearly within the realms of reality.

With regards to tangibility and existence I hold no stance of; if I can't see it then it's not there.

The presence of something can be inferred without a direct experience of it; I think that is the case with many religionists - ambiguity is clearly the issue.

No one has to define reality for you, reality defines itself quite nicely. And so far, reality has never shown gods to exist.

Here you speak for yourself (just thought I'd remind you). Reality doesn't define itself, your persception of reality allows you a definition. Is that subjective?

Why should it be? It's a simple matter of translating a single message in all languages - what's so difficult about that?

People and their concepts of what exactly is being stated. One severly over-used and thus cliche word I've seen here is "strawman".

Successful communication means all the information in the original message is retained. So you communicate something to me and my formulation of your communique is the exact duplicate of your concept.

I would suspect, according to theists, that the creation of a universe would be considered all-powerful. Sending a message to all the folks of this puny planetoid would be childs play, don't ya think?

Sure. Making them understand it without ambiguity might not be so easy.

It's a very simple matter of comparing the tens of thousands of religious doctrine in the world with each other and finding glaring and blatant differences and discrepancies.

Give me one.

Surely, a single god who revealed his single message to all has failed dramatically.

There are many ways of looking at things apparently: some blame the lecturer while others blame the student. Everyone tends to avoid blame but what is rational about that?

 

[Godless]

Clearly you exxagerate with the number of world religions... at least the major ones.

No exxageration, there has been literally thousands of religion and that's just in the (Judeo Christian) denominations. Now count all the Islamics, Hindus, Buddhist, etc.. throughout all men's history, ancient beliefs have been in the thousands. Same as Gods, From Thor, Zeus, Allah, and the Christian simplicity of "God" there literally have been thousands of gods men have believed exist for them.

click

list of gods

What if Eve had never bitten the apple?

We would still be naked

Godless

 

[Cris]

We would still be naked.

Best answer yet.

 

[(Q)]

I think some are more in line with rationality than others.

If the supernatural is involved, I would seriously doubt there exists rationality.

The presence of something can be inferred without a direct experience of it; I think that is the case with many religionists - ambiguity is clearly the issue.

Absolutely, but what are the reasons for their inference? One can infer a great deal without direct experience.

Reality doesn't define itself, your persception of reality allows you a definition.

Our perception of reality is whatever reality has defined. We don't close our eyes and reality changes or disappears, nor do we perceive that which does not exist in reality.

Making them understand it without ambiguity might not be so easy.

I don't see why it wouldn't be easy. Why wouldn't a clear message be understood by all?

Give me one.

Islam and Christianity.

some blame the lecturer while others blame the student.

How can one blame the lecturer if that lecturer is god? Yet, we must if he cannot get a single message across to his own creations. If a god created us, he would have instilled such a communication method in all of us. Yet, I and about 15% of the worlds population have never experienced such a communique. Those who claim they have cannot agree on each others.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

*************
M*W: On your list of gods, I didn't see Medicine*Woman anywhere???

 

[Medicine*Woman]

What if Eve had never bitten the apple?

We would still be naked

Godless

*************
M*W: Why is it not a sin to eat an apple (or other fruit) today? Something doesn't make sense here.

 

[Vindicator]

... there has been...

... there are...

See the temporal difference.

 

[Vindicator]

If the supernatural is involved, I would seriously doubt there exists rationality.

Reasons (not common knowledge)?

Absolutely, but what are the reasons for their inference?

I may not be able to say... intellectual responsibility compells one to find out before arriving at conclusions.

Our perception of reality is whatever reality has defined.

True, but we can be mistaken. You may refer to the overused flat earth and geocentric solar system analogies.

Perception and understanding are quite intertwined.

We don't close our eyes and reality changes or disappears, nor do we perceive that which does not exist in reality.

We who? Sure, reality doesn't change: our perception of it does.

I don't see why it wouldn't be easy. Why wouldn't a clear message be understood by all?

Clarity depends on the nature of the message, the sender, and the receiver.

As I stated previously (which you apparently missed) if there is God, God is in the realms of reality.

The message God would send, then, must be one which must be interpreted from the realms of reality.

Which human can claim a masterful understanding of reality, which may be clearly communicated to all?

Islam and Christianity.

Ok. How about the discrepancies regarding the nature of God?

If a god created us, he would have instilled such a communication method in all of us.

So we might look for such a commonality within humanity then? Maybe its there in front of our faces but we are just not looking at it (perceiving it?) in the correct way.

Again you may reference the overused "then and now" analogies.

 

[c7ityi_]

*************
M*W: Why is it not a sin to eat an apple (or other fruit) today? Something doesn't make sense here.

Do you even know what the story means?

 

[okconor]

yes, do you?

doesn't seem like any body else is too bothered though.

 

[okconor]

In my opinion the story of Genesis is an analogy for the creation of the Universe and the development of human life on this planet.

Adam and Eve are usually taken to be the names of two individuals. Adam was the old Hebrew word for first man and Havah meant first woman. There are vague differences in the text where Genesis refers not to individuals but to the tribe of Adam, especially in the The Generations of Adam, suggesting a group of individuals.

Here it mentions that Adam and his prodigy usually lived to the ripe old age of 800 or so, and usually "begat" the next generation at 150, all the way down to Noah (500 years old if I remember correctly). Obviously not possible.

But again, terms are very roughly translated, like "Ages", "Years" and "generations", yet they are the same word in the old text.

Use only the word Generations then you now read the text as; the first tribe of Man (Adam) lived for 800 generations, after 150 generations they gave rise to the tribe of Seth who lived for....and so on.

The interesting thing here is that the rate of useful genetic mutations usually occur approx every 2-3000 years, or about 150 generations in Human terms!

So, then Noah becomes the first Homo Sapien, saved after a great flood (ice age melt?).

Nothing unusual. The normal way that we would expect a species evolve.

Why Adam first? The rib business? 7 days? Want more?

 

[Cris]

okconor,

So what is the justification for a savior if we evolved? The idea is that we were created perfect but A&E decided to disobey and thus deserved punishment that could only end with a son god.

If we evolved then we were not created perfect and are still learning, there was no garden, there was no tree of knowledge of good and evil, and there was no apple, and no original sin to warrent punishment.

Without A&E being literal it is difficult to see the justification for Christianity.

 

[spidergoat]

If Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel, who did Cain and Abel have sex with?

 

[Cris]

Probably the virgins created by Allah.

 

[Lucidfox]

About the first post:In the beginning animals weren't meant to be slaughtered for food. Their diet consisted of plants, fruits, vegetables, etc. Only have the first sin did people start slaughtering animals for meat.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

If Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel, who did Cain and Abel have sex with?

*************
M*W: Their sisters or their mother.

 

[c7ityi_]

So you DON'T understand the story.

 

[(Q)]

Reasons [rationality] (not common knowledge)?

Perhaps its not rational to believe in that which has never been shown to exist. Further, it may not be rational to lead ones life based on those beliefs. It may further be shown that it is irrational for some to control others based on those beliefs, although those in that power role may consider it completely rational, based on their own desires.

intellectual responsibility compells one to find out before arriving at conclusions

Agreed, but that doesn't appear to be the case.

You may refer to the overused flat earth and geocentric solar system analogies.

Proclaimed and protected ideals from a theistic thinking and decision making process. Please note the use of the scientific method coupled with critical thinking have dispelled those ideals.

Which human can claim a masterful understanding of reality, which may be clearly communicated to all?

A 'masterful' understanding of reality does not exist, but perhaps one day may, if science is allowed to pursue that understanding and not be hindered by religious ignorance.

God, I presume, should have a masterful understanding of reality, especially since he created it, and should therefore be quite able to convey that understanding to all.

How about the discrepancies regarding the nature of God?

"In the Bible God "draws near", "comes down" and seeks after us in order to enter into an intimate relationship with us. The whole Bible is the story of God seeking man.

In contrast, the Qur'an portrays God as one who is "far", who is transcendent only. As a Muslim theologian has said, "God reveals only his will, not himself. He remains forever hidden". Islam is about man trying to please God by obeying his will.

The Bible reveals God as taking the initiative and coming down to seek after us. The movement is in the opposite direction."

http://answering-islam.org.uk/lovesus.html

Maybe its there in front of our faces but we are just not looking at it (perceiving it?) in the correct way.

What exactly are we to perceive, and how are we to assume it is there if it is invisible and undetectable in any way? And how is it such that many have already made their own interpretations of the invisible and undetectable? Imaginations perhaps?

The only commonality we all have is reality. We can observe reality and agree upon many things upon which reality is based. If scientists perception of reality were as varied as theists, we would unlikely have the many things science has provided.

What has religion provided?