Egg-xactly!
Axel, that is pretty much an exact summerization of what I meant–are you a sock?? 
Freyr writes:
I say we put god in a home.
Aren’t these the same Christians who believe that man can only be saved through God’s good graces?
Well, what if there were nothing to save them from? No sin to be cleansed of?
Again, consider where I’m coming from. According to Jewish mythology, the Messiah is David Returned, a holy warrior who will save his people in their time of need and bring peace to all mankind. Sort of like King Arthur, with Elijah filling in for Merlin.
Now, over the last few thousand years, certain sectors of Judaism, which have adopted a number of Christian and Muslim beliefs, have made him into something more than that - but that’s the basic spiel.
As for the aspects that seem to interest you, well… as I’ve said several times before, I don’t argue with fundies, and I don’t discuss Christian theology. I’m not qualified.
So where at this point in the bible had God been billed as just and kind. The OT God could and would kick major butt whenever he wanted. Look at the Plagues of Egypt or S&G or the many military victories he helped win for the Israelites.
The real question is why dosen’t God smite people any more or is this the real reason behind the Israelie army ability to kick butt. (eg 7 day war)
**F_N wrote:
I say we put god in a home.**
He’s your God, not mine. You decide what to do. I’m heading back to the weekly scheduled orgy in Alfheim. 
**SPOOFE Bo Diddly wrote:
Aren’t these the same Christians who believe that man can only be saved through God’s good graces?
Well, what if there were nothing to save them from? No sin to be cleansed of?**
[Emperor Palpatine voice]Yes, Yes…feel the Paganism flow thru you! Come join me on the Pagan side of the Force! Bwahahahahahahahahaha![/Emperor Palpatine voice].
**Alessan wrote:
Again, consider where I’m coming from. According to Jewish mythology, the Messiah is David Returned, a holy warrior who will save his people in their time of need and bring peace to all mankind. Sort of like King Arthur, with Elijah filling in for Merlin.**
When you say “saved” do you mean in the religious sense of “achieving salvation/enlightenment/joining God in heaven” or something like “preventing them from dying in an attack”?
Also, as you said, bring peace to all mankind, wouldn’t it be more applicable to say peace to all Jews? Very few people outside of Judeaism today would care about the return of the Judaic Warrior/King.
Alessan,
We disagree on so much, isn’t it heartwarming?
Clearly we are discussing the merits of the notion of original sin, which is a core Christian belief. It holds that all modern people (even you!) are in a state of sin because of Adam & Eve’s ™ original sin. Thus, we are guilty for something we didn’t do, simply because we are human. This is absurd for most Jews, Muslims and Bunkers (those who say “Bunk”, of course), but since when did absurdity affect patterns of belief? It seems to reinforce them.
All of this amounts to proving Santa Claus can’t visit all those homes in one night. The true believer says “Yeah, whatever.” Logical flaws don’t interfere with beliefs that are held for non-logical reasons. Also, they rarely hear these arguments anyway. I have a networking guru friend who does free work for charitable organizations, and he set up a Catholic school’s network. He had to put in a proxy server filtering out sites containing, among the usual porno sites, any sites containing words like atheism, secular humanism, etc.
I have an out for the zealots, though: Adam’s first bite was sin-free, his second was sinful. Maybe they use this excuse?
Adam should have said, “I don’t care what you do to me - Give me liberty of give me death, eternal fire, anything you can throw at me. I will be free. You are my creator, yes. Thanks for that; that’s as far as it goes. I don’t have to worship you. I don’t care how much you love me, how much you think I owe you for creating me, but I’m going to use this mind of mine to explore human values, human goals, human passions. I’m going to live my life.”
Adam & Eve didn’t have to eat the fruit to know not to eat the fruit. Why? Because God told them. Their understanding of this one command is made clear by Eve’s conversation with the snake before she ate the fruit.
Yes, they knew not to eat the fruit. But it still wasn’t a sin, because they didn’t know about good and evil.
Eating the fruit was not a sin. It was disobedience, yes, but it was not a sin. The story is about the origin of sin! It’s about where sin came from. Humankind could not sin until Adam ate the fruit. Therefore only actions committed after that moment could be sins.
BUT, God punished Adam, and indeed all of Mankind, for the Original Sin of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge, when he didn’t know what sin was. Fecal_nugget presents this as proof that God is a prick (or more accurately, He would be if this story were true. Actually he (f_m) is suggesting that literalists must be mistaken in their beliefs. He is saying the story is not true as stated. He is challenging us to either acknowledge the falsity of the story or the prickiness of God).
Anybody here believe the story is true as stated and also that God represents perfect love?
We are guilty of sin even when we “come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23), which happened when Adam ate the forbidden fruit. No evil intent is needed.
I dunno…he punished Adam, but not as bad as he threatened. G-d said, “Eat the fruit and you’ll die”. When Adam ate the fruit, all G-d did was kick him out of the Garden, and make it so that Eve would have labor pains.
Freyr, it’s more that the messiah will “save them from being destroyed”. He’s supposed to create a Jewish state in Israel, have all Jews move there, and make it so everybody, Jew and non-Jew obey G-d’s laws. (understanding that G-d’s laws for non-Jews differ from G-d’s laws for Jews)
ImNotMad, I don’t know how many Christian organizations preach that interpretation, but it’s the first I’ve heard of it. Traditionally, the notion of sin is that sin is doing the wrong thing, as defined by God. The reason Adam’s sin was the original one was precisely because that’s when we learned about right and wrong. If you believe that mainstream Christian churches preach your way, that the Orignal Sin was only original because it happened to be the first one, not because it was when Adam learned right from wrong, let me know. Otherwise I’ll presume yours to be a minority view.
Let me ask you this:
Did Adam know it was wrong to eat of the tree of knowledge before he did it?
A simple question. If the answer is yes, then Adam already knew right from wrong, and the story is wrong. If the answer is no, then God is a prick.
Hmm. Actually, the whole story of Genesis can be viewed as an attempt to derive an “ought” from an “is”. That is, to describe a set of historical events that prove an ethical injunction. Yet the author had to cheat; it had to already be wrong for Adam to do what he did in order for him to be held accountable.
I occurs to me, religionists have faith because they want their religion to be true. Atheists lack faith because they want it to be false. Some want to live forever with a loving father, others just want to have a decent human life and get out. I wish everyone could get what they want, but I kind of doubt it.
(Cap’n A: I always thought the idea was that if Adam ate of the fruit he would eventually die, meaning he would no longer be immortal. I don’t know if this is the common belief, though)
Axel Wheeler:
It was the first sin, and it resulted in our knowledge of good and evil.
Yes
Adam knew not to eat the fruit of the tree.
Then you think a command from God is cheating? Why? I don’t have any reason to believe that Adam had any communication problems with God before he ate the fruit.
Freyr!! I thought I told you to leave those elves alone! Do you know how hard it is to find a competent elphoproctologist to take care of their problems when you’re through!!
Seriously, it occurs to me that this thread has been a massive effort of disproving a naive system of beliefs not held by most intelligent people over the age of ten.
The majority of thoughtful people who read the Bible see it as containing a lot of symbolic language, with a message and a point but not necessarily factual literality. (Needless to say, there are a few who have deified it, and put it on an altar as their God.)
Captain Amazing wrote:
He didn’t say that Adam would die immediately when he ate the fruit, just that he would die. And, a few hundred years after noshing on a nice juicy piece of GoodAndEvilFruit, Adam did die, didn’t he?
How DARE you besmirch Star Wars by involving Palpatine in a debate over Christianity.
Pistols on the commons at dawn, knave!
Well, not immediately, but Exodus 2:16 says
**SPOOFE Bo Diddly wrote:
Pistols on the commons at dawn, knave!**
I’ll send my second, Capt. Butler, of Charleston!
**Polycarp wrote:
Freyr!! I thought I told you to leave those elves alone! Do you know how hard it is to find a competent elphoproctologist to take care of their problems when you’re through!!**
You think the Elves have it bad? What about me!? Besides, the mead in Alfheim is nearly as good as Valhalla! happy sigh
**Captain Amazing wrote:
Freyr, it’s more that the messiah will “save them from being destroyed”. He’s supposed to create a Jewish state in Israel, have all Jews move there, and make it so everybody, Jew and non-Jew obey G-d’s laws. (understanding that G-d’s laws for non-Jews differ from G-d’s laws for Jews)**
Sorry, I gotta disagree with you here. At least about the part on obeying G-d’s laws. I gave up the J/C/I faith long ago, so I’m no longer bound by its rules. Think if it this way; I live in the US but do some action that is considered illegal in France but not in the US. Does the French government have the right to arrest and try me? Its the same way with me and the J/C/I G-d.
Come on, Freyr, you know it doesn’t work that way. Religion is a zero-sum game. I’m betting on one horse, you’re betting on another; we can’t both win. But don’t worry - the laws we’re talking about here are basically “don’t eat human flesh” and “don’t sleep with first-degree relatives”, so I doubt you’ll need to make that many adjustments.
Besides, it may turn out that you’re right and I’m wrong, and theis world is actually a pagan, polytheistic shmorgesborg of gods and Goddesses. It actually sounds fun, if somewhat messy.
P.S. Could you send Skirnir round with a tankard?
The Ryan wrote:
I’m sure you meant Genesis 2:16, not Exodus 2:16.
I hadn’t noticed the “in the day that thou eatest thereof” part before. That does kinda wipe out my argument, doesn’t it? (Then again, the NIV translation merely says “when you eat of it you will die.”)