Wonderful Heaven
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
Enigma'07 you seemed to miss the point. When you are accused of something you must address the accusation. Pointing out another’s fault does not do this. In the scripture posted God is accused of being unjust. Instead of addressing the accusation God simply turns around and makes an accusation of his own. Which doesn’t in anyway address the issue.
If I were to accuse you of stealing my car (as I see you are obviously driving it). You then saying: “Well you kissed my wife”, does not address the FACT that you stole my car. If anything, we could surmise that you are most likely guilty as you seem to be trying to deflect the question.
In the scripture sent to me God is obviously admitting he is indeed unjust. He just tries to justify it by saying – well so are you – which further erode already Gods lackluster credibility.
If I were to accuse you of stealing my car (as I see you are obviously driving it). You then saying: “Well you kissed my wife”, does not address the FACT that you stole my car. If anything, we could surmise that you are most likely guilty as you seem to be trying to deflect the question.
In the scripture sent to me God is obviously admitting he is indeed unjust. He just tries to justify it by saying – well so are you – which further erode already Gods lackluster credibility.
If I were to accuse you of stealing my car (as I see you are obviously driving it). You then saying: “Well you kissed my wife”, does not address the FACT that you stole my car. If anything, we could surmise that you are most likely guilty as you seem to be trying to deflect the question.
Let's alter the scenerio so it's more accurate. Say your car is a black '99 accura. You see me driving around in a car that is a black '99 accura, so you asume that I stole your car. Yes, that is one possibility, but perhapse I also own a '99 accura.
Bottom line: God is sovreign. He is just. He is merciful.
Let's alter the scenerio so it's more accurate. Say your car is a black '99 accura. You see me driving around in a car that is a black '99 accura, so you asume that I stole your car. Yes, that is one possibility, but perhapse I also own a '99 accura.
Bottom line: God is sovreign. He is just. He is merciful.
My pleasure!
Genesis 18:20-33
This is a dialog between God and Abraham. God has told Abraham that He is going to destroy Sodom. Abraham asks the Lord if He would spare the city if there were 10 righteous men, and God said yes.This is his mercy.
Genesis 19:1-21
God sends a angel to Lot warning him to leave the city. While the angels are there, the townsmen come asking for the visitors. Lot offers them his daughters instead. This shows Lot's corruptness. Yet still, God chooses to spare Lot and allow him to escape the city. This is mercy. His justice is shown when he destroys the city.
Jonah (the whole book)
God decides that He will send a prophet to warn the people of Ninevah what would happen if they didn't repent. This is mercy. Jonah choose to disobey and flee to the opposite direction. God brought a huge storm on the boat until Jonah was thrown overboard. He then sent fish to swollow him. This is mercy because He could have just let him drown, but God allowed him a second chance.
II Kings 2:23-24
As Elisha is traveling to Bethel, young men from the town come to jeer at him with cries of "go up baldhead!" daring his to enter their city. Elisha curses them and two bears emerge from the woods and kill every last young man. This is justice.
Would you like more examples, or is this good for you?
grace be to you
SouthStar,
Why would God punish Adam for doing something wrong when Adam had no idea what was meant by right and wrong and could not have known it was bad to eat from the tree until AFTER he had eaten from the tree.
God is seen here as the ultimate fraud and trickster and that is definitely not fair.
Kat
So why didn't he explain about right and wrong before Adam ate from the tree that gave him the knowledge of right and wrong?
Why would God punish Adam for doing something wrong when Adam had no idea what was meant by right and wrong and could not have known it was bad to eat from the tree until AFTER he had eaten from the tree.
God is seen here as the ultimate fraud and trickster and that is definitely not fair.
Kat
Katazia said:
He knew very well that Adam would eat from the tree.
Think about it this way:
Even if He had told Adam, do you really think that would have stopped him from eating from the tree?
Adam knew right and wrong for the same reason you know right and wrong.
What I meant to say is you know right and wrong, but you didn't eat of the tree now did you?
Again Adam knew right and wrong
The eating of the fruit imparted that knowledge to Adam. Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil...
But we inherited that knowledge from Adam and Eve, according to the bible. Otherwise, why would we still suffer from the curse of death?
Gee all of ten people (nice round number that happens to correspond to the number of fingers and toes we have) were saved (and this is the KEY) FROM God!Enigma'07 said:
That’s not mercy. Mercy would be not killing people for living their life in a way God didn’t like. All this shows is that God is a Killer not that he is Merciful.
Again god the Killer NOT God the Merciful.Enigma'07 said:
Haaaa!! Too FUNNY!Enigma'07 said:
I’m Soooo merciful I’m going to Hurt you if you don’t do as I want.God sounds like He has the rational of a stunted child ..
You make God out to be an imbecile.
This I like the most
Yup – God the Killer again.Enigma'07 said:
I see again and again why Satan got the f*ck out! Your God is a bit loony!
SouthStar,
Adam couldn't have known he was doing any wrong BEFORE he ate the fruit.
I do not believe there is an escape from this paradox. Note that it also destroys the entire justification for damming mankind and the reason why Jesus had to be crucified and resurrected. In essence this paradox condemns the entirety of Christianity as a fraud, wouldn’t you agree?
Kat
How? Isn't the purpose of the tree to provide that knowledge as invert states? If it isn't then why did it exist?
Adam couldn't have known he was doing any wrong BEFORE he ate the fruit.
I do not believe there is an escape from this paradox. Note that it also destroys the entire justification for damming mankind and the reason why Jesus had to be crucified and resurrected. In essence this paradox condemns the entirety of Christianity as a fraud, wouldn’t you agree?
Kat
Katazia said:
Well what I'm saying is Adam had a knowledge.
What you are trying to say is that God didn't give Adam a chance, which "condemns the entirety of Christianity as a frauid".
Let me explain it to you:
15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."
Do you see the operative phrase here? It is "you must not". God offered him a choice. Eat from the tree, and "you will surely die".
So as you can see, this was not actually a matter of "right and wrong".
Here is a scenario that might help:
Someone tells you you may play with any toy in the room, but you must not play with the wiring. If you do so, you will surely die.
If you do happen to play with the wiring, certainly I hope you understand that there was no "right and wrong" about the action.
This same logic can be applied to the scenario to help you understand what went on in the garden.
And that is the reason I said:
And so you see it really is "fair". It's not like God neglected to tell Adam that he would die if he ate from the tree.
That's the point. It's called shooting fish in a barrel.
How did Adam know what "you will surely die" means? Nothing's died yet. This was the beginning of death.
I'm going to digress here a moment. The garden of eden myth is an upside down version of the myth of the original death in almost every ancient myth system throughout the world. In the original, the first death was brought about by murder (Cain and abel, strangely reversed in order from the original as you will soon see). There was a murder among the early peoples who had never known death or struggle or even food for that matter; they had no need of food they were immortal basically. Anyway, someone murdered someone and immediately afterwards was filled with shame for having done it. He tried to hide his deed by burying the head (usually it's a decapitation). From this buried head a plant grew, usually the main staple of the region. So, death and life from the same source. For, after that time children were born and people died. See any resemblance? It's all topsy-turvy isn't it? Now, why would they do that, I wonder? It's also interesting to note that the serpent was believed to be the husband of the goddess figure of early religions. The serpent was seen as a symbol of wisdom and knowledge. Now, this basic pattern has been found in culture after culture all throughout the world. Before you say it's god or satan in action, there is a line of travel that it took. The early migrations of the early humans carried this myth with them everywhere and it transformed here and there along the way. But the archetypes remained.
Now, back to topic,
The hell you say, if you're talking about someone who has no idea of the functioning of this "wiring" which you even apply with the toy analogy, then it would most definitely be an issue of right and wrong, on the person who knows of the wiring and is deliberately placing this child in a situation where he's going to electrocute himself. So, right and wrong would apply to God in this case and coincidentally enough, he is the one who had the knowledge already. Again, it's a deliberate ploy to set his will in action. Part of which will is to place the blame upon poor Adam and Eve and the serpent. All of whom only did exactly what god willed them to do.
I wouldn't. For one thing, the god we're dealing with in this myth has very little to do with the god of christianity no matter what they claim. The christian god is tricky as well though.
For another, no one ever said that God had to be fair. Southstar is attempting to defend god, but in truth God needs no defending as is made so clear in all the attempts in the bible to blame god. God is excellent at sidestepping and diverting the issue, but that's entirely in his venue.
I would say that it condemns god as tricky and cruel.