@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:...leave the religion, because it is a fraud.
Not as fraudulent as someone who dismisses/ignores/ridicules other interpretations that blow a huge hole in his argument.
@neologist,
Neo wrote:Would not a perfect conscience impel one to act morally without ruminating over details? Jesus referred to this conscience at Matthew 7:9,10
Humans are born blind without even depth perception let alone a "perfect conscience"...
Conscience is learned through Gnosis, not magic fairy dust...
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
The way for them to get that knowledge...was to allow them to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
He expressly forbid that...because it would make Adam and Eve like gods...who have the knowledge of good and evil.
Why the god did not want Adam and Eve to be like gods...we don't know.
I think it is clear that he DID want them to be like God (himself).
Quote:
But to suppose the god wanted them to know...but forbid them from getting the knowledge makes no sense.
The reason that gives it meaning was the same then as now. He wanted them to want that knowledge (even if momentarily) more than they wanted life itself.
I never cease to be amazed at the inability of some to understand the issues of Genesis chs, 1-3.
At the end of the 6th day, God declared his work "good". - Genesis 1:31. Yet, some are so obtuse as to declare God must have been wrong, that his work was deficient, or that he had in mind an era of unmatched sadism.
Some declare that God's work was not good enough. Adam and eve were too naieve to understand the gravity of God's warning. They claim their God given conscience neded augmntation, that instinctively knowing it was wrong to rape, steal, and murder, needed additional information.
Additionally, they deny the operation of free will, claiming God should have known in advance the danger posed by the upcoming rebellion. Thereby, they conveniently remove the responsibility for error from the perpetrators and place it upon the creator.
They gloat over their own stadards of morality and fairness, while indicting the originater of those standards.
So, who has not only the right, but the obligation to set standards for his creation? God, or his creation? Should the pot criticize the potter?
@neologist,
neologist wrote:They claim their God given conscience neded augmntation, that instinctively knowing it was wrong to rape, steal, and murder, needed additional information.
Knowing that it's wrong to rape steal and murder without the knowledge of good and bad, i.e. rape, theft and murder is a contradiction. It's obtuse not to see the contradiction in the flawed myth.
There's a certain pathology in rationalizing it.
@InfraBlue,
You know its wrong to rape.
Do you really have to think about it?
@neologist,
Quote:
At the end of the 6th day, God declared his work "good". - Genesis 1:31.
I haven't heard anyone say it wasn't good. I think it's rather obvious that it wasn't finished though. Still isn't for that matter.
@Leadfoot,
What do you think needs to ne done?
@neologist,
For man to mature and leave childish things (like denominational dogma) behind.
@neologist,
neologist wrote:
You know its wrong to rape.
Do you really have to think about it?
I'm also neither Adam or Eve.
@Leadfoot,
Are you saying we were created to manifest denominational dogma. Or, is that part of the imperfection that has crept in since the rebellion?
@InfraBlue,
neologist wrote: You know its wrong to rape.
Do you really have to think about it?
InfraBlue wrote:I'm also neither Adam or Eve.
Good. I had hoped you would not have claimed otherwise.
So, you appear to understand how a conscience operates.
What about in more complex matters?
Suppose you are a logger/lumber producer.
How many trees should you cut in a given area?
@Joe Sixpack,
neologist wrote:
So, you appear to understand how a conscience operates.
This in no way addresses the contradiction in your take of the story. Adam and Eve would not "know" that rape is "bad" without the knowledge of what is "good and bad."
I was taught that rape is "bad."
You're forgetting who you are posting as.
@Joe Sixpack,
Quote:Are you saying we were created to manifest denominational dogma. Or, is that part of the imperfection that has crept in since the rebellion?
Definitely not the former but the latter is true since there were no denominations until well after Adam & Eve.
But what I was really saying is that Neo should engage the logical arguments being made rather than reading from the play book of his denomination.
Also, there was no 'rebellion' in the Adam & Eve story in my view.
@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot wrote: . . . Also, there was no 'rebellion' in the Adam & Eve story in my view.
One translation for the word 'satan' is 'rebel'.
@neologist,
What I'm saying is that there was no rebellion on the part of Adam & Eve. Satan's rebellion happened long before that.
@Leadfoot,
Isn't disobedience rebellion?