Why the atheists or whatever you guys are , and i do respect your opinion and your beliefs , always talk about Christianity ?
You know...there is also God in Judaism, there is God in Islam, Mohamed, Moses- both prophets, just like Jesus....
Why always bashing Christianity ? You guys know very well that Christians did build up Europe, don't you ? The Christians fought against Ottoman Empire , not the people like Voltaire or Rousseau.
Okay first of all i hate your guts, I can understand you at all!!!! and I have an atheist friend and she is really cool she doesn't hate god but she doesn't like him either. AND YOU SOUND LIKE A DYING STUIPED RETARD you fag!
The bible can't be understood without the spirit of God. What makes you think that just by your simple observation that u r going to decipher this great mystery. I'll give u a hint, u r way off. Your making the same mistake most ppl make. Your taking the story literally.
@mindwis3 Is like this, we all have a spirit inside, this of course is not an entity, it's like a form. The words of God are his spirit, so the bible contains the "spirit" of God. But you need to believe. Believe is something that works at your core, and can't explain in detail here. The bible is a spiritual book, with spiritual teachings, they are concepts. The spirit of God is the will and frame of God. All who believe have the spirit of God.
"Is like this, we all have a spirit inside, this of course is not an entity, it's like a form. The words of God are his spirit, so the bible contains the "spirit" of God"
i'm sorry, but this doesn't clarify anything :-/
For god you are now just substituting "his words" with "spirit", that's not an explanation..
As for "All who believe have the spirit of God." that does not 'rhyme" with your earlier remark "Your making the same mistake most ppl make" since most are believers.
@mindwis3 Ok, I'll give you another example. When a person reads a book, what they are doing is reading the spirit of the book. There is message in the book and that is the spirit of the book. When you speak, your words are spirit and my spirit will demodulate your words. What is it that you don't understand. Jesus said, my words are spirit and truth. Your last comment makes no sense to me.
@marsita77 Well, you said to me, dude my words are a verbal expression of my thoughts. That, means nothing to me, I understand what you are trying to say, but if I want to play the same game, I will tell you, it simply doesn't cut it. You see, you have no idea what thoughts are, you say my thoughts, and we say our thoughts, but you can't explain to me what thoughts are, so I can play the same game. I gave you an anology, but you don't want to accept it, what else can I tell you.
@mindwis3 You see, that's why I can't stand atheists, you people are really anal, and I mean anal for everything. Look, I told you from the beginning and it's in the bible. Worldly people can't understand spiritual things becaue they are foolishness to them, and that is exactly how you are responding. If you can't grasp my anology, allegory, explanation, examples, then we can't communicate. Haven't you ever heard the expression, the spirit of things, he's in good spirits, wines and spirits.
"that's why I can't stand atheists, you people are really anal"
Yeah, all of them eh...they're all the same those "anal atheists".
" Haven't you ever heard the expression, the spirit of things"
Sure, i've also heard "he looks like he's seen a ghost" ... or "the sun rises".
So in "he's in good spirit", it means "happy" or something, and in "in the spirit of things" it means something else and in "wines and spirits" something else again "a
Wil je `t echt de waarheid weten of is dit gewoon een weg om te babbelen? Stel; iemand zegt zulke sterke dingen, die je niet kunt weerleggen, zou je dan christen worden? Ik denk `t niet. Terwijl jij op dat bankje zat en slechts één of twee aspecten van de bijbel besprak, waren er elders in de wereld christenen het evangelie aan `t vertellen aan allerlei mensen, waren ze hen aan `t dopen, zagen ze de wonderen van God en baden ze in Jezus' Naam. God komt wel tot zijn doel, mét of zonder Mindwis3.
"Terwijl jij op dat bankje zat en slechts één of twee aspecten van de bijbel besprak"
- Wat bedoel je LJB, ik moet in 10 minuten de hele bijbel bespreken ?
Bovendien is dit stuk toch wel zo'n beetje de fundering van het NT.
Wat me opvalt is dat je niet inhoudelijk reageerd, maar wel met een compleet onnodige veronderstelling mbt mijn karakter komt met je "Ik denk `t niet.".
Ik denk zelf namelijk van wel, dus liever vraag je het je me de volgende keer.
Verder komt jouw god ook wel tot zijn doel zonder LJB, dus ook dat was overbodig.
Die mensen die het evangelie aan het vertellen zijn he, zijn dat die mensen die ook zeggen dat ze toch vooral geen condooms moeten gebruiken? Dat komt namelijk nogal eens voor, terwijl dat de verspreiding van Aids nogal zou inperken, of zijn dat alleen katholieke evangelisten?
zagen de wonderen van god, tjsa, hindus zien wonderen van hun goden, en atheisten zien helemaal geen wonderen... gek he ?
It doesn't make sense until it makes sense. Somehow we do all kinds of bad things because Adam and Eve disobeyed. But we get to say "the devil made me do it."
There are many problems with taking the story literally. Where does one river ever divide into four heads? Rivers come together and continue as one. Where did the source river come from anyway when it hadn't rained yet?
As allegory the Garden of Eden shows how error entered the religious world. Satan is the God of the religious world.
It's funny how you realize the fall was His Plan and yet thousands of Pastors and clergymen don't see this fundamental truth. But then you contradict yourself by saying IF THEY DIDN'T SIN we might not be here today. There is no IF. The fall was surely of God so its futile to speculate what would have been because the fall was inevitable! Rom 8:20 tells us the fall was by reason of HIM.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention this. Here's another classic dubland belief. Everybody will die on the day Adam and Eve ate from the tree. Yes! You read that right. Everybody who has ever lived or died will die "on the same day" Adam and Eve ate from the tree. The 7th day (God's day of rest) never ended. Look it up. Every day concludes EXCEPT the 7th day. Dubs don't believe God's day of rest ends until after the thousand year reign of Jesus Christ. Then he starts "creating stuff" again in paradise
Hi Anzwertree, thanks for sharing your insights..... and you explained some weird ways of thinking indeed.
I find it particularly interesting how the JW's cling on to that "1000 years") (which i guess is rooted in "Peter", and is completely unrelated (and irrelevant) to the creation myth)....
@mindwis3 Dude, you don't know crazy. Trust me. I was raised as a JW, and those of us who leave understand crazy intimately. These things aren't nothings. The thousand year reign belief is no where near the depths of absurdity fundamentalist can plunge. Check out some stuff on the Vast Apostate Army here on Youtube. Or better yet, just read Watchtower literature. It's full of logical fallacies
This is how I would have explained it back when I was a JW. The nakedness they felt was not just their physical nakedness. Once they ate from the tree, their eyes became open. But they always knew the difference between good and bad. The Bible never said they didn't know the difference between right and wrong. The serpent said they would "become like God, 'knowing good and bad'." This could be rationalized away by believers in one obvious way. (continued)
@anzwertree__(continued comment) The Bible uses sexual themes a lot in prophecy. Reading Song of Solomon is a lot like reading porn. Then there's the kings of the earth who "fornicate with the harlot" of revelation. How anybody can take this stuff seriously is a mystery, but let me finish. What happened in Eden was not merely an understanding of good and bad, but the actual knowledge of it. They came to "know it" - intimately. Think Star Wars, in other words - they were seduced by lust for it
You should also talk about how "jesus died for your sins." makes no sense at all. What does that phrase even mean? What does his dying have to do with my sins? I slipped on banana to clean your shirt, that makes more sense.
Also, there's some weird machine behind you, what is that?
The point is that the true year 1626 BC of the Venus tablets thus proves by all these other global world chronologies that Adam is 4025 BC and 6000 was 1975 AD.
Greek 3600 for Babylon is 1600 BC. Babylon's 3600 for Babylon is 1600 BC. Hindu 3600 for Babylon is 1900 BC (5500 BC Adam /500 AD Armageddon). Mayan 3600 where 3114 BC is Adam's 2256 AM and 1770 BC is Noahs 1344 makes 1770 BC their 3600 for Babylon. It is globally locked in around this planet speaking against evolution of humans.
All chronologies (pagan & pagan used by Christian, i.e. Catholics used the Greek 5200 BC Adam) are based on Babylon as the year 3600 of Adam. Noah's Flood is called the creation of the world. Hindu 3102 BC /Greek 2958 BC / Babylon 2947 BC /Egyptian 3090 BC. But the 3600 counts from Adam. This comes from 2400+3600 = 6000 to Armageddon; buut the pagans reversed it as 3600+2400 = 6000. So 5200 BC Adam and 2947 BC Flood has an 800 AD for the kingdom in 6000.
Man had the death of animals to see and know many things not to do or die. The tree not to eat was only an extension beyond all natural law of what you know not to do or it kills you. The tree represented not absolute death, but death risk. Know that in the day you go near any DEATH RISK you are pushing the risk to die. And that day you will begin a spirit atitude that leads to death.
Adam was created in 4025 BC proven by the Venus tablets being year 2400. However, Greeks use 1600 BC as year 3600. Maya use 1770 BC as year 3600. Hindu use 1900 BC as year 3600. etc etc etc so that 2400 in 1626 BC proves Adam was 4025 BC not evolution of humans.
Death of animals did exist for 42,000 years (6x 7000 years) until Adam. The death of human concern is human death not animal. The skins Adam wore after his dispute with Eve is from dead animals. Abel is the first man who died; the murder was a sin.
Man's sin does not start up the death of animals. Sin of man brings death of man into the world of man. Not death of animals into the world of animals. Day 1 for 7000 years is plankton and algae, it dies. Day 2 is air spores and molds and bacterias in the air, they die. And sea animals created die.
Day 3 land plants die, and land animals die, and Day 4 the dinosaurs die, and all life is born and lives and dies but has reason it dies that man will and can learn not to ever die. Not until day 6 ends in 42,000 years after light first shined down on the ocean does man awake as Adam.
perfection does not mean no mistakes. You are correct that a mistake means to choose a path and realize the other path must be switched to. And correct the whole path cannot be undone. But this is not sin. In fact atonement is a correction factor and so is good, NOT a mere mistake patchup that should not ever occur. English word ignorant is a bad word, to some it means to not know, and to others it means deliberately ignore by choice to ignore.
Already carbon dilution is finished, petroleum exausted and returned to the air, volcanoes erupt, asteroid impact next.Life returns to 900. Armageddon is a building going up, not just a demolition crew of the old building. The issue of good and bad need not be shoved in the faces of people, simple fact is God is remodeling, so live by getting out of the way.
Why does life drop. Is it degeneration. Genesis proves no it is not. It is something that starts with Noahs grandson (438) conceived on the ark, yet will effect his father Shem who lives 600 instead of Noahs 950. It is carbon-14 on the DNA molecule of all life. Three generations lived 438 /433 /464 and then three generations lied 239 /239 /230. It is radioactive half-life of Noahs 950.
This brings into account motherhood. Jesus must have a wife as Adam had a wife, so that the world are children raised by that wife. How so? Because when born into the world, the one who is your mother are all those who tell you what to do, the city, the school, the teachers, the medics, the neighbors. The mother is corrupt, and we must have a true mother.
Original sin merely means we need a better father than we started with. Even angels from heaven increased human death rather than solved it. So the redemntion sacrifice is a spiritual one, not one of DNA science. It is a psychological science that is being fixed by one man for one man.
Because genetics is purified by breeding, it does NOT deteriate as religion claims. Proof is Methuselah (969) outlived Adam (930), and so did Noah (950) who was even uneffected by postFlood physical changes in the world. The spiritual nature of sin is described by Genesis. Adam blamed others for his no longer seeking all things to avoid death. The children decided to be like Eve or be like Adam. Eve the younger knows what older does not, so like Rebecca she sees God in Jacob.
Religion failed in th emodern genetics. They connected original sin to DNA. Sin is spiritual in its nature, not genetic. Sin does have genetic effects but Moses said only into 4 generations which is what he meant when he said that Jehovah does curse up to 4 generations (if no inbreeding). The 4 wives clear up the genetic error.
Im inclined to believe that your believe in FATE. Fatalism is the belief that all events are determined by the divine will or by some force greater than man, that every event must take place as it does because it has been predetermined.
Hi Cloud, no i don't believe Fatalism as you call it (determinism?).... neither in divine will.
I believe in forces greater then man, but those forces do not possess any will or consiousness (i.e. tectonmic plate movement).
I'm not arguing for determinism, i'm just saying that IF future choices are knowable now (which i do not believe) THEN all actions are predetermined. (concequence)
@mindwis3 Ok lets take a look at something ... If a mans life is not foreseen is it predestined regardless if ones life can be foreseen? Also if something is foreseen it implies nothing about how the knowledge is derived and may apply to Gods perfect reasoning experiance or his ability to see into ones heart to derive the choice one will make etc...
"Alright let me ask you another question then... does God have shame?"
- i don't think the god of the bible has shame, unfortunately, he could use some and apologize a bit.
- "What does it mean to have knowledge of good and bad?".
It means you can evaluate your actions, like understand that eating the fruit of a tree is bad when the owner of that tree told you not to.... kind of what the whole point is here.
that was suppose to be redeemed. Damn! Also too, that Genesis had about 10 authors, and is largely allegorical. And non-sentiant animals cannot sin, since they are purely instinctual. It is us who make the choice to do or not to do right/wrong.
Have you not heard that ignaorance is bliss? These two, humanity's parents (Christian/Jew perspective) had self pride. Tempted and fell. Their punishment became our punishment. We were resemed from that punishment through Christ's sacrifice, and beat death through His resurection. Shounds like you got it to me, just a little fuzzy on the finer points. Keep questioning though. God loves a healthy skeptic. ;-)
Ignorant means: the state in which one lacks knowledge, right? Adam was full of knowledge. He named everything. He was at the beginning of the earth, so he knew how the earth was created, without a theory, Adam knew God and had only one choice. He made the wrong choice. So there goes knowledge.. Adam was a super-human, so to say. Freshly made by God. And still, he sinned greatly. You have the same simple choice today as Adam.
Someone not aware of i.e. his nudity is how we see animals, ignorant.
He only named the animals, and 'naming' does not equate to knowledge.
He was not there 'at the beginning' of the earth, not even when animals were created according to genesis.
'super human' why would you say that ?
My choice is not the same, since i DO have knowledge of "good an evil" THAT is the crucial difference, the reason he cannot have been aware he was doing good or bad.
Midwis3 in regards to your reply to hemelburger. eating from the tree of knowledge of the good and the bad did not mean that they had no morality at all before it. It simply represented God's soveirgnty and how it was his right to choose right and wrong. when adam and eve ate from the tree they decided to rebel against God and become moraly independent and choose for themselves what was the right and wrong and act accordingly to it. .
This knowledge is a privilege which God reserves to himself and which man, by sinning, is to lay hands on, 3:5, 22. Hence it does not mean omniscience, which fallen man does not possess; nor is it moral discrimination, for unfallen man already had it and God could not refuse it to a rational being.
The immediate effect of their transgression was shame . Hence they used fig leaves to make loin coverings for themselves. Aslo hiding themselves from God. Both Adam and Eve immediately had guilty consciences upon breaking Gods law; that is why they hid themselves. All things are clean to clean persons, but they no longer felt clean, due to their sin. (Titus 1:15) This in reality could mean that they viewed there nakedness in a perverse way now that sin had entered.
Eventhough they where free to have sexual relations think about how they felt knowing there offspring would now all carry sin and death. Your looking at the words you read but arnt looking deep into the matter. I dont blame you either its only natural to do so when you dont believe in it. I incourage you to study the scriptures deeply in search for answers.
Adam had free will to choose to do the correct thing or the wrong thing. Prior to Adams disobedience, Jehovah God had examined all of his earthly creation, including the first human pair, and had determined that it was very good. (Genesis 1:31) Thus, when Adam sinned, his Creator did not need to correct some design flaw but RIGHTLY placed the blame squarely on Adam. (Genesis 3:17-19) Adam had failed to let love for God and right principle motivate him to be obedient to God above all.
So he was not created with a moral weakness, so he didnt lacked the ability to make sound decisions or to withstand temptation. He was made perfect in Gods standards. Now to the point of FATE as you also make reference too it was Adams choice to make the decision. Even 1 Timothy 2:14 says "Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and came to be in transgression." So he diliberatly sinned knowing that he was doing something wrong and knowing there would be a consequence
Talking about FATE and the fact that you say God set them up. would be opening up a whole new subject which would refer to many parts of the bible so whenever where done with A&E we can talk about fate.
I myself understand that theres alot of points I dont hit in my comments back and that by stateing something you can always come up with more disagreements or more questions. But simply put God created adam perfect to his standards and so when they sinned they where guilty in Gods perfect justice. How are we to judge God in something he knows 100% about when we only come to usumptions as to saying they didnt know or they couldnt make the right choice. God knows they could thats why there guilty.
@mindwis3 If you read the bible it teaches that God is just. That adam and eve where created to his perfect standards giveing them free will. If they where in some way defective then Gods judgement on them would not have been just. I do have a lot of questions myself but I actually find the answers not just wallow in confusion... but as you say to each his own.
" If you read the bible it teaches that God is just." ..Dear cloud, i have read the bible, so i can say that according to my standards, god is NOT just. (2Ki2 for example).
Besides, if you think god is all merciful too, then he cannot be all just, since mercy is less punishment than justified..
"but I actually find the answers" .. i disagree, i think you make up answers and think you found them..... (cont.2)
@mindwis3 ... one more thing i only stated that there can be more questions but for this topic my comment should have answered your question unless you choose not to believe then thats your personal choice.
" my comment should have answered your question unless you choose not to believe"
Hmmm, you gave me your view, but not an answer...
and i cannot "choose not to believe" (or choose to believe)....
For me, "believing" is not a matter of choice, but a product of reasoning.
If convincing evidence is presented, i will be convinced, and if flimsy wishful thinking is presented, then flimsy wishful thinking is what i see ....
@mindwis3 When I say that "we can only make ssumptions" I say it in regards to what we believe while on the other hand the bible gives us the answer... theres no need to make assumptions. I didnt jump the gun by saying that that God knows they could thats why there guilty... its very clear that the bible teaches this. which by the way is the topic at hand and the bible is the source of the conversation.
@mindwis3 I do understand your point and through out my comments I answer that very question in detail. You fail to grasp it and I think you need to study some more. The bible never says that Humans where made to fail they where made for a very different purpose. Im sorry but I cannot share your view in saying that it was a set up or part of a plan which of course im willing to open this topic for discussion as well.. The bible does not teach this, its only a mans(aka you) opinion/assumption.
@mindwis3 This is where your mistaken ive quoted every scripture I needed to that clearly states this. NOT MY OPINION. Yet you continue to use that as a way to make your point. You on the other hand have no biblical backing only speculative views. They didnt have shame because they where perfect. They had nothing to be ashamed of. Shame is not needed to make a correct choice its only the outcome of a bad one.
@mindwis3 So your saying when you read a verse its an opinion.... Interesting. I didnt assume anything about your knowledge of the scriptures hahaha. Im just letting you know that if you want to talk about the bible they way you are it would be good to hear you quote some scriptures as your foundation otherwise its comeing from your mouth and not really what the bible says.
@mindwis3 Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad. (Ge 3:22) What they gained was moral independence from God. God had already told them what was right and what was wrong they had that knowledge of good and bad but by takeing from the fruit they lost Gods favor and connection and they became moraly independent.
"God had already told them what was right and what was wrong" - i did not know this, quote please (and hurry buddy).
"they became moraly independent" and righty so, since god's moral compas is way off. (Deut 22:28-29, where a girl has to marry her rapist.....or is that the "justice" you speak of?
@mindwis3 And Jehovah God proceeded to take the man and settle him in the garden of E′den to cultivate it and to take care of it. 16 And Jehovah God also laid this command upon the man: From every tree of the garden you may eat to satisfaction. 17 But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die.
That's what makes you say "God had already told them what was right and what was wrong", that's the k nowledge of "good and evil" ?
Come on dude, you're not serious here, are you ?
That is no knowledge of good and evil, that's utting english to someone who does not understand that language. How were they to evaluate his "command" ?
@mindwis3 Adam and Eve were created upright and were told of the course that would mean life, but they sought out another plan, acted ruinously on their own, and became defective. Eccl. 7:29; Deut. 32:5)
@mindwis3 Not exactly God has the ability to foreknow events, but the Bible shows that he makes selective and discretionary use of that ability, with due regard for the free will with which he has endowed his human creation.—Compare Genesis 22:12; 18:20, 21.
" with due regard for the free will with which he has endowed his human creation"
Ooow, that's so old, and it's not true either.
Free will in and of itself already negates anyones ability to 'foresee' anything.
You cannot both have determinism and free will.
If free will existsm choice is open and therefore that choice is not foreseeable (else the choice is already fixed, and therefore free will is out the door).
@mindwis3 Rev. 22:17: Let anyone hearing say: Come! And let anyone thirsting come; let anyone that wishes take lifes water free. (The choice is not foreordained; it is left to the individual.)
"The choice is not foreordained; it is left to the individual."
It does not matter if the choice was or was not foreseen.
What matters is, can things be foreseen, if so then choices are fixed, an illusion.
It does not even matter if god himself can foresee, all that's needed to render free choice a farce is forseeability, not if it actually was foreseen.
@mindwis3 Turn back, please, every one from his bad way and from the badness of your dealings . . . that I may not cause calamity to you. (Jeremiah 25:5, 6) This appeal would be pointless if God had already fixed each individuals destiny. Moreover, Gods Word states: Repent, therefore, and turn around so as to get your sins blotted out, that seasons of refreshing may come from the person of God. (Acts 3:19)
@mindwis3 Wrong... "forseeablitiy" does not render free choice a farce. I can forsee that the sun will rise tommarow but do I make it happen haha no. An astronomer can foretell when a certain comet is going to streak through the sky, or when there will be an eclipse of the sun or moon. Does his foreknowledge of the comets visit or the eclipse make such things happen?
@mindwis3 God can either look into or refrain from looking into our mind, can either foresee the course our mind will direct us into or withhold such knowledge from himself. In any event, we are created free moral agents and use that freedom as we choose.
@mindwis3 When you have close friends and learn their mannerisms or mental tendencies or peculiarities, you often know in advance what they will do under certain circumstances. But your foreknowledge due to insight into their personalities does not force them to so act, does it? They still act of their own free will, unmaneuvered and uncoerced by your foreknowledge, do they not?
@mindwis3 Forknowledge is the synonym of foresee. I think the outcome of this convo would be what you believe foreseeing is... I would love for you to give your definition of foresee so that I can see where your comeing from.
@mindwis3 If God foreordained and foreknew Adams sin and all that would result from this, it would mean that by creating Adam, God deliberately set in motion all the wickedness committed in human history. He would be the Source of all the wars, the crime, the immorality, the oppression, the lying, the hypocrisy, the disease. But the Bible clearly says: You are not a God taking delight in wickedness. (Ps. 5:4)
Again, it's irrelevant if he does or does not always preordain or foresee.
The fact that the future is foreseeable renders free will (choice) pointless as there is 100% chance of once choice being the outcome, and 0% of any other choice being chosen.
now ""the One telling from the beginning the finale",
Do you claim this means God did NOT know the outcome from the beginning ?
@mindwis3 Rom. 2:4, 5: Do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and long-suffering, because you do not know that the kindly quality of God is trying to lead you to repentance? But according to your hardness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and of the revealing of Gods righteous judgment. (There is no forcing of individuals to pursue a prescribed course. But there is accountability for what one does.)
@mindwis3 wow... did you just say that lol.... Gods commandments are for our benefit... . What the scripture is saying is that Love FOR God means that we observe his commandments. So adam and eve showed the lack of love for God when they disaboyed him. the bible clearly describes love i can give you that scripture if you dont know it.
@mindwis3 Did God know adam and eve would sin? Would you encourage your children to undertake a project with a marvelous future, knowing from the start that it was doomed to failure? Would you warn them of harm, while knowing that you had planned everything so that they were sure to come to grief? Is it reasonable, then, to attribute such to God?
@mindwis3 Matt. 7:11: If you, although being wicked [or, bad as you are, NE], know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will your Father who is in the heavens give good things to those asking him?
@mindwis3 Here is what God set before Adam and Eve: Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving upon the earth. (Gen. 1:28; 2:16, 17) point being that God a purpose for them ... they sinned on there own not according to plan and ruined that.
@mindwis3 What I would like to see is some scriptures that would back up your IDEAS on a PLAN. I disagree with you completely on the plan aspect of humans. They where not made to fail, they had a purpose.
@mindwis3 I would also like to see scriptures that back up all your ideas. If you want to talk about the bible you better be quick on quoting from it buddy. I understand that many aspects are opinions BUT when i qoute scriptures that clearly say God is just etc then thats what the bible teaches not my opinion.
@mindwis3 one last thing... I really want a scripture that says they werent "AWARE" of things... Its true that they where ashamed after they sinned but that doesnt prove to me that they lacked awareness of the outcome for there actions.
" doesnt prove to me that they lacked awareness of the outcome for there actions"
really, tell me, ad they ever experienced anything like "death" ? was that something that existed there?
It was the tree of knowledge of good and evil (try Gen 3:5).
Or try 3:7 "And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves girdles."
their eyes were opened after eating, it's right there, that's an "opnion" ?
@mindwis3 No thats not an opinion ... the opinion is you saying that this in one way or another PROVES that God made humans only to fail.. saying that God set them up. Thats an opinion.
@mindwis3 Remember they where created perfect to Gods standards and if hes just then judgeing them incorrectly would go agaisnt God and the bible. If what your saying is true that they where in some way lacking sense/awareness that would lead them to make a negitive choice ... then God would not have acted in Justice.
@mindwis3 In all honesty I ask that you read all my comments again and come to understand that this "dictionary" you speak of didnt exist in the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They already had it. You continue to think that adam and eve where in same way lacking something... when they where not.
It is the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence by which man refuses to recognise his status as a created being. The first sin was an attack on Gods sovereignty, a sin of pride.
OMG I feel like I'm at university again drooling over this really cool, confident, enlightened professor that makes me want to learn . . . FROM HIM!! Hah, look at the bike *giggles* naked in the garden
Adam and Eve(like children) were supposed to be two sentient cognitive beings who have no knowledge or awareness of good and evil(sin) but was instructed by a god character not to eat from the tree which would enlighten them. In other words; the god character arranged it so that only after they eat from the forbidden tree are they capable of understanding that eating from the tree was in fact a sin. An unjust and immoral thing to do by a all loving god.
@itchycoopark sistah why you pushin up on the white man? he'll put you in chains, beat you and call you kizzy. .....but he is kinda hot. i'm with you. he can sit on my face ANY day. thanks
Here are a few ironic Adam & Eve questions for Christians.
1. Why would a "perfect" god, who created women & men to be fruitful and multiply, make them shameful over being nude?
2. Since Adam & Eve were not created covered with animal skins, why would an omnipresent and all-knowing god incorporate shame into their thinking, and how could this be of value to them when they were made for each other?
3. How does the knowledge of good and evil make Adam & Eve shameful about their naked bodies?
If Adam and Eve didn't get kicked out of the Garden you and I wouldn't be even around to have a discussion.
When there is no death, there can't be any cell death (that my interpretation at least) thus there can't be any sexual reproduction as that would lead to the demise of many sperm cells who couldn't fertilize an egg.
But then the creation story itself is conflicting as genesis 1 & 2 contradict each other on how things were created.
Saying that, does bring me back to that song , 'reenacting' the "why didn't i think of that" a naturalist, whose name forgot, said when he read on the origin of species...
Hey 2ups in one day. Are you going for a hattrick?
Anyways. Thinking of all the ilogical moronic and incoherent things about the bible is in my view to torment yourself. An easy way to "explain" the fall of humankind would be this...
God made Adam in his own image.
Later on he made Eve to keep him company.
Just think. God would be a man. " men and one women.....
Of course they got kicked out when Eve picked Adam.
Why the atheists or whatever you guys are , and i do respect your opinion and your beliefs , always talk about Christianity ?
You know...there is also God in Judaism, there is God in Islam, Mohamed, Moses- both prophets, just like Jesus....
Why always bashing Christianity ? You guys know very well that Christians did build up Europe, don't you ? The Christians fought against Ottoman Empire , not the people like Voltaire or Rousseau.
ExtremaDreapta 5 months ago
Okay first of all i hate your guts, I can understand you at all!!!! and I have an atheist friend and she is really cool she doesn't hate god but she doesn't like him either. AND YOU SOUND LIKE A DYING STUIPED RETARD you fag!
mollyjoey123 8 months ago
@mollyjoey123 sorry i about retard i meant to say A STUIPED DYING CHICKEN FAGG!
mollyjoey123 8 months ago
@mollyjoey123
"sorry about retard i meant to say A STUIPED DYING CHICKEN FAGG!".
hehe, well good you straightened that out ;)
take care young man.
mindwis3 8 months ago
The bible can't be understood without the spirit of God. What makes you think that just by your simple observation that u r going to decipher this great mystery. I'll give u a hint, u r way off. Your making the same mistake most ppl make. Your taking the story literally.
cmpresents 10 months ago
Hi cmpresents
When you say "he bible can't be understood without the spirit of God"
that makes me wonder since "the spirit of god" can't be understood without the bible?
If so, why would you need a bible.
" the same mistake most ppl make. Your taking the story literally."
- Sure, then i ask you: can anything be taken literally from the bible, and if so, how do you determine this?
"the spirit of god"... how do you define "spirit", and why do you have that, and "most ppl" don't ?
Kr,
mindwis3 10 months ago
@mindwis3 Is like this, we all have a spirit inside, this of course is not an entity, it's like a form. The words of God are his spirit, so the bible contains the "spirit" of God. But you need to believe. Believe is something that works at your core, and can't explain in detail here. The bible is a spiritual book, with spiritual teachings, they are concepts. The spirit of God is the will and frame of God. All who believe have the spirit of God.
cmpresents 10 months ago
@cmpresents
"Is like this, we all have a spirit inside, this of course is not an entity, it's like a form. The words of God are his spirit, so the bible contains the "spirit" of God"
i'm sorry, but this doesn't clarify anything :-/
For god you are now just substituting "his words" with "spirit", that's not an explanation..
As for "All who believe have the spirit of God." that does not 'rhyme" with your earlier remark "Your making the same mistake most ppl make" since most are believers.
mindwis3 10 months ago
@mindwis3 Ok, I'll give you another example. When a person reads a book, what they are doing is reading the spirit of the book. There is message in the book and that is the spirit of the book. When you speak, your words are spirit and my spirit will demodulate your words. What is it that you don't understand. Jesus said, my words are spirit and truth. Your last comment makes no sense to me.
cmpresents 10 months ago
@cmpresents
"When a person reads a book, what they are doing is reading the spirit of the book."
"the spirit of the book" is something to be taken figuratively, not literally, the irony is i can now paraphrase you:
"Your taking the story[expression] literally."
"When you speak, your words are spirit and my spirit will demodulate your words. "
What?
Dude, my words are a verbal expression of my thoughts, and your brain is the thing that tries to make sense of my words.
mindwis3 10 months ago
@mindwis3 That's right, you, are taking the story literally, not me. Your words are spirit, but I see this is over your head.
cmpresents 10 months ago
@cmpresents
"Your words are spirit" ..
Fine, so then spirit you say is just another word for 'my words'.
And that is then over my head.... fine..
It seems to me you can't really give me a definition for "spirit" that's meaningful since all you say is "your words are spirit".
Rather then insulting me for not accepting such a poor definition, you could try to explain better.
"Your words are spirit" simply does not cut it unless you mean spirit(us) is latin for breath, i very much doubt that.
marsita77 10 months ago
@marsita77 Well, you said to me, dude my words are a verbal expression of my thoughts. That, means nothing to me, I understand what you are trying to say, but if I want to play the same game, I will tell you, it simply doesn't cut it. You see, you have no idea what thoughts are, you say my thoughts, and we say our thoughts, but you can't explain to me what thoughts are, so I can play the same game. I gave you an anology, but you don't want to accept it, what else can I tell you.
cmpresents 10 months ago
@cmpresents
"but you can't explain to me what thoughts are, so I can play the same game. I gave you an anology"
No, you gave me a synonym, which i accepted but said is redundant, i gave you an analogy.
An analogy btw, for "my words", which included the term 'thoughts", i was not explaining what "thoughts" are, you are now confusing things.
"You see, you have no idea what thoughts are"
.. you hardly know me, but yet make that claim, that's just silly, you ask before making that claim.
mindwis3 10 months ago
@mindwis3 You see, that's why I can't stand atheists, you people are really anal, and I mean anal for everything. Look, I told you from the beginning and it's in the bible. Worldly people can't understand spiritual things becaue they are foolishness to them, and that is exactly how you are responding. If you can't grasp my anology, allegory, explanation, examples, then we can't communicate. Haven't you ever heard the expression, the spirit of things, he's in good spirits, wines and spirits.
cmpresents 10 months ago
@cmpresents
"that's why I can't stand atheists, you people are really anal"
Yeah, all of them eh...they're all the same those "anal atheists".
" Haven't you ever heard the expression, the spirit of things"
Sure, i've also heard "he looks like he's seen a ghost" ... or "the sun rises".
So in "he's in good spirit", it means "happy" or something, and in "in the spirit of things" it means something else and in "wines and spirits" something else again "a
So 'spirits" are drinks with alcohol, yes?
marsita77 10 months ago
@marsita77 You are an asshole.
cmpresents 10 months ago
Wil je `t echt de waarheid weten of is dit gewoon een weg om te babbelen? Stel; iemand zegt zulke sterke dingen, die je niet kunt weerleggen, zou je dan christen worden? Ik denk `t niet. Terwijl jij op dat bankje zat en slechts één of twee aspecten van de bijbel besprak, waren er elders in de wereld christenen het evangelie aan `t vertellen aan allerlei mensen, waren ze hen aan `t dopen, zagen ze de wonderen van God en baden ze in Jezus' Naam. God komt wel tot zijn doel, mét of zonder Mindwis3.
Leesjebijbel 1 year ago
@Leesjebijbel
"Terwijl jij op dat bankje zat en slechts één of twee aspecten van de bijbel besprak"
- Wat bedoel je LJB, ik moet in 10 minuten de hele bijbel bespreken ?
Bovendien is dit stuk toch wel zo'n beetje de fundering van het NT.
Wat me opvalt is dat je niet inhoudelijk reageerd, maar wel met een compleet onnodige veronderstelling mbt mijn karakter komt met je "Ik denk `t niet.".
Ik denk zelf namelijk van wel, dus liever vraag je het je me de volgende keer.
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3
Verder komt jouw god ook wel tot zijn doel zonder LJB, dus ook dat was overbodig.
Die mensen die het evangelie aan het vertellen zijn he, zijn dat die mensen die ook zeggen dat ze toch vooral geen condooms moeten gebruiken? Dat komt namelijk nogal eens voor, terwijl dat de verspreiding van Aids nogal zou inperken, of zijn dat alleen katholieke evangelisten?
zagen de wonderen van god, tjsa, hindus zien wonderen van hun goden, en atheisten zien helemaal geen wonderen... gek he ?
mindwis3 1 year ago
It doesn't make sense until it makes sense. Somehow we do all kinds of bad things because Adam and Eve disobeyed. But we get to say "the devil made me do it."
There are many problems with taking the story literally. Where does one river ever divide into four heads? Rivers come together and continue as one. Where did the source river come from anyway when it hadn't rained yet?
As allegory the Garden of Eden shows how error entered the religious world. Satan is the God of the religious world.
houseofjustin 1 year ago
It's funny how you realize the fall was His Plan and yet thousands of Pastors and clergymen don't see this fundamental truth. But then you contradict yourself by saying IF THEY DIDN'T SIN we might not be here today. There is no IF. The fall was surely of God so its futile to speculate what would have been because the fall was inevitable! Rom 8:20 tells us the fall was by reason of HIM.
JAKEHARRIS281 1 year ago
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention this. Here's another classic dubland belief. Everybody will die on the day Adam and Eve ate from the tree. Yes! You read that right. Everybody who has ever lived or died will die "on the same day" Adam and Eve ate from the tree. The 7th day (God's day of rest) never ended. Look it up. Every day concludes EXCEPT the 7th day. Dubs don't believe God's day of rest ends until after the thousand year reign of Jesus Christ. Then he starts "creating stuff" again in paradise
anzwertree 1 year ago
@anzwertree
Hi Anzwertree, thanks for sharing your insights..... and you explained some weird ways of thinking indeed.
I find it particularly interesting how the JW's cling on to that "1000 years") (which i guess is rooted in "Peter", and is completely unrelated (and irrelevant) to the creation myth)....
Ah well, interesting side track ATree, thanks.
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Dude, you don't know crazy. Trust me. I was raised as a JW, and those of us who leave understand crazy intimately. These things aren't nothings. The thousand year reign belief is no where near the depths of absurdity fundamentalist can plunge. Check out some stuff on the Vast Apostate Army here on Youtube. Or better yet, just read Watchtower literature. It's full of logical fallacies
anzwertree 1 year ago
This is how I would have explained it back when I was a JW. The nakedness they felt was not just their physical nakedness. Once they ate from the tree, their eyes became open. But they always knew the difference between good and bad. The Bible never said they didn't know the difference between right and wrong. The serpent said they would "become like God, 'knowing good and bad'." This could be rationalized away by believers in one obvious way. (continued)
anzwertree 1 year ago
@anzwertree__(continued comment) The Bible uses sexual themes a lot in prophecy. Reading Song of Solomon is a lot like reading porn. Then there's the kings of the earth who "fornicate with the harlot" of revelation. How anybody can take this stuff seriously is a mystery, but let me finish. What happened in Eden was not merely an understanding of good and bad, but the actual knowledge of it. They came to "know it" - intimately. Think Star Wars, in other words - they were seduced by lust for it
anzwertree 1 year ago
You should also talk about how "jesus died for your sins." makes no sense at all. What does that phrase even mean? What does his dying have to do with my sins? I slipped on banana to clean your shirt, that makes more sense.
Also, there's some weird machine behind you, what is that?
InturnetHaetMachine 1 year ago
i wanna fuck this pretty blond boy.
TheGreezyNigger 1 year ago
The point is that the true year 1626 BC of the Venus tablets thus proves by all these other global world chronologies that Adam is 4025 BC and 6000 was 1975 AD.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Greek 3600 for Babylon is 1600 BC. Babylon's 3600 for Babylon is 1600 BC. Hindu 3600 for Babylon is 1900 BC (5500 BC Adam /500 AD Armageddon). Mayan 3600 where 3114 BC is Adam's 2256 AM and 1770 BC is Noahs 1344 makes 1770 BC their 3600 for Babylon. It is globally locked in around this planet speaking against evolution of humans.
elijahovah 1 year ago
All chronologies (pagan & pagan used by Christian, i.e. Catholics used the Greek 5200 BC Adam) are based on Babylon as the year 3600 of Adam. Noah's Flood is called the creation of the world. Hindu 3102 BC /Greek 2958 BC / Babylon 2947 BC /Egyptian 3090 BC. But the 3600 counts from Adam. This comes from 2400+3600 = 6000 to Armageddon; buut the pagans reversed it as 3600+2400 = 6000. So 5200 BC Adam and 2947 BC Flood has an 800 AD for the kingdom in 6000.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Man had the death of animals to see and know many things not to do or die. The tree not to eat was only an extension beyond all natural law of what you know not to do or it kills you. The tree represented not absolute death, but death risk. Know that in the day you go near any DEATH RISK you are pushing the risk to die. And that day you will begin a spirit atitude that leads to death.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Comment removed
elijahovah 1 year ago
Comment removed
elijahovah 1 year ago
Adam was created in 4025 BC proven by the Venus tablets being year 2400. However, Greeks use 1600 BC as year 3600. Maya use 1770 BC as year 3600. Hindu use 1900 BC as year 3600. etc etc etc so that 2400 in 1626 BC proves Adam was 4025 BC not evolution of humans.
elijahovah 1 year ago
@elijahovah
" etc etc etc so that 2400 in 1626 BC proves Adam was 4025 BC not evolution of humans"
I'm sorry Elijah, i don't quite follow what you're saying here....
mindwis3 1 year ago
Death of animals did exist for 42,000 years (6x 7000 years) until Adam. The death of human concern is human death not animal. The skins Adam wore after his dispute with Eve is from dead animals. Abel is the first man who died; the murder was a sin.
elijahovah 1 year ago
@elijahovah
"Death of animals did exist for 42,000 years (6x 7000 years)"
- how do you get to 6x7000, and how to animals dying before original sin ?
gen 3:21 is not conclusive animals died, it says god made clothes from skins.
That's always so tricky, since god can reportedly make a universe from nothing, i suppose god can make animals skins from nothing too :)
Thanks,
mindwis3 1 year ago
Man's sin does not start up the death of animals. Sin of man brings death of man into the world of man. Not death of animals into the world of animals. Day 1 for 7000 years is plankton and algae, it dies. Day 2 is air spores and molds and bacterias in the air, they die. And sea animals created die.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Day 3 land plants die, and land animals die, and Day 4 the dinosaurs die, and all life is born and lives and dies but has reason it dies that man will and can learn not to ever die. Not until day 6 ends in 42,000 years after light first shined down on the ocean does man awake as Adam.
elijahovah 1 year ago
The word sin comes from 1943 BC when enSu or Su-en was the correction of the moon that Abram at 75 disagreed with.
elijahovah 1 year ago
perfection does not mean no mistakes. You are correct that a mistake means to choose a path and realize the other path must be switched to. And correct the whole path cannot be undone. But this is not sin. In fact atonement is a correction factor and so is good, NOT a mere mistake patchup that should not ever occur. English word ignorant is a bad word, to some it means to not know, and to others it means deliberately ignore by choice to ignore.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Already carbon dilution is finished, petroleum exausted and returned to the air, volcanoes erupt, asteroid impact next.Life returns to 900. Armageddon is a building going up, not just a demolition crew of the old building. The issue of good and bad need not be shoved in the faces of people, simple fact is God is remodeling, so live by getting out of the way.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Why does life drop. Is it degeneration. Genesis proves no it is not. It is something that starts with Noahs grandson (438) conceived on the ark, yet will effect his father Shem who lives 600 instead of Noahs 950. It is carbon-14 on the DNA molecule of all life. Three generations lived 438 /433 /464 and then three generations lied 239 /239 /230. It is radioactive half-life of Noahs 950.
elijahovah 1 year ago
This brings into account motherhood. Jesus must have a wife as Adam had a wife, so that the world are children raised by that wife. How so? Because when born into the world, the one who is your mother are all those who tell you what to do, the city, the school, the teachers, the medics, the neighbors. The mother is corrupt, and we must have a true mother.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Original sin merely means we need a better father than we started with. Even angels from heaven increased human death rather than solved it. So the redemntion sacrifice is a spiritual one, not one of DNA science. It is a psychological science that is being fixed by one man for one man.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Cain the older sees himself like Esau in which proud father Adam and Isaac at first see older as wiser, but both were proven wrong.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Because genetics is purified by breeding, it does NOT deteriate as religion claims. Proof is Methuselah (969) outlived Adam (930), and so did Noah (950) who was even uneffected by postFlood physical changes in the world. The spiritual nature of sin is described by Genesis. Adam blamed others for his no longer seeking all things to avoid death. The children decided to be like Eve or be like Adam. Eve the younger knows what older does not, so like Rebecca she sees God in Jacob.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Religion failed in th emodern genetics. They connected original sin to DNA. Sin is spiritual in its nature, not genetic. Sin does have genetic effects but Moses said only into 4 generations which is what he meant when he said that Jehovah does curse up to 4 generations (if no inbreeding). The 4 wives clear up the genetic error.
elijahovah 1 year ago
Im inclined to believe that your believe in FATE. Fatalism is the belief that all events are determined by the divine will or by some force greater than man, that every event must take place as it does because it has been predetermined.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
@cloud144000
Hi Cloud, no i don't believe Fatalism as you call it (determinism?).... neither in divine will.
I believe in forces greater then man, but those forces do not possess any will or consiousness (i.e. tectonmic plate movement).
I'm not arguing for determinism, i'm just saying that IF future choices are knowable now (which i do not believe) THEN all actions are predetermined. (concequence)
Rgds,
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Ok lets take a look at something ... If a mans life is not foreseen is it predestined regardless if ones life can be foreseen? Also if something is foreseen it implies nothing about how the knowledge is derived and may apply to Gods perfect reasoning experiance or his ability to see into ones heart to derive the choice one will make etc...
cloud144000 1 year ago
Alright let me ask you another question then... does God have shame? What does it mean to have knowledge of good and bad?
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
"Alright let me ask you another question then... does God have shame?"
- i don't think the god of the bible has shame, unfortunately, he could use some and apologize a bit.
- "What does it mean to have knowledge of good and bad?".
It means you can evaluate your actions, like understand that eating the fruit of a tree is bad when the owner of that tree told you not to.... kind of what the whole point is here.
mindwis3 1 year ago
that was suppose to be redeemed. Damn! Also too, that Genesis had about 10 authors, and is largely allegorical. And non-sentiant animals cannot sin, since they are purely instinctual. It is us who make the choice to do or not to do right/wrong.
empacae 1 year ago
Great video. Never been to the Netherlands, but it looks lovely. I miss working for the Dutch firm that I use to here in Canada.
empacae 1 year ago
Greetings fellow smoker.
Have you not heard that ignaorance is bliss? These two, humanity's parents (Christian/Jew perspective) had self pride. Tempted and fell. Their punishment became our punishment. We were resemed from that punishment through Christ's sacrifice, and beat death through His resurection. Shounds like you got it to me, just a little fuzzy on the finer points. Keep questioning though. God loves a healthy skeptic. ;-)
empacae 1 year ago
seriously...you gave this 110 times more thought in evaluation than the person who wrote it in the bronze age....
will you argue the spherical, flat earth controversy next?
MumblingMickey 2 years ago
"will you argue the spherical, flat earth controversy next?"....
hehehe, i'm afraid that's actually not a bad idea :)
mindwis3 2 years ago
Two ignorant beings?
I think Adam wasn`t ignorant at all.
Ignorant means: the state in which one lacks knowledge, right? Adam was full of knowledge. He named everything. He was at the beginning of the earth, so he knew how the earth was created, without a theory, Adam knew God and had only one choice. He made the wrong choice. So there goes knowledge.. Adam was a super-human, so to say. Freshly made by God. And still, he sinned greatly. You have the same simple choice today as Adam.
Hemelburger 2 years ago
Hi Hemelburger, thanks
How i see it:
Someone not aware of i.e. his nudity is how we see animals, ignorant.
He only named the animals, and 'naming' does not equate to knowledge.
He was not there 'at the beginning' of the earth, not even when animals were created according to genesis.
'super human' why would you say that ?
My choice is not the same, since i DO have knowledge of "good an evil" THAT is the crucial difference, the reason he cannot have been aware he was doing good or bad.
KRgds,
mindwis3 2 years ago
Midwis3 in regards to your reply to hemelburger. eating from the tree of knowledge of the good and the bad did not mean that they had no morality at all before it. It simply represented God's soveirgnty and how it was his right to choose right and wrong. when adam and eve ate from the tree they decided to rebel against God and become moraly independent and choose for themselves what was the right and wrong and act accordingly to it. .
cloud144000 2 years ago
Hi Cloud, thank you for your addition.....
When you say : "did not mean that they had no morality at all before it"
Can you explain why they A&E did not notice the fact they were nude before eating from that tree.
And can you explain why after eating they felt the urge to cover themselves?
That must have to do with eating the fruit, as that was a sign for god that they did eat from it.
Thanks,
mindwis3 2 years ago
The Jerusalem Bible (1966):
This knowledge is a privilege which God reserves to himself and which man, by sinning, is to lay hands on, 3:5, 22. Hence it does not mean omniscience, which fallen man does not possess; nor is it moral discrimination, for unfallen man already had it and God could not refuse it to a rational being.
cloud144000 2 years ago
"This knowledge is a privilege which God reserves to himself"
- Which knowledge?
"and which man, by sinning, IS TO lay hands on"
- So, it went according to plan ??
Genesis 3:7 reads "And the eyes of them both were opened".. hence before their eyes were closed (figurative for their knowledge of good&evil).
Hence, they could not have made a good decision between good or evil, and when they ate, that was the plan.
I'm sorry, i don't see how what you wrote changes this.
Rgds,
mindwis3 2 years ago
The immediate effect of their transgression was shame . Hence they used fig leaves to make loin coverings for themselves. Aslo hiding themselves from God. Both Adam and Eve immediately had guilty consciences upon breaking Gods law; that is why they hid themselves. All things are clean to clean persons, but they no longer felt clean, due to their sin. (Titus 1:15) This in reality could mean that they viewed there nakedness in a perverse way now that sin had entered.
cloud144000 2 years ago
Eventhough they where free to have sexual relations think about how they felt knowing there offspring would now all carry sin and death. Your looking at the words you read but arnt looking deep into the matter. I dont blame you either its only natural to do so when you dont believe in it. I incourage you to study the scriptures deeply in search for answers.
cloud144000 2 years ago
Adam had free will to choose to do the correct thing or the wrong thing. Prior to Adams disobedience, Jehovah God had examined all of his earthly creation, including the first human pair, and had determined that it was very good. (Genesis 1:31) Thus, when Adam sinned, his Creator did not need to correct some design flaw but RIGHTLY placed the blame squarely on Adam. (Genesis 3:17-19) Adam had failed to let love for God and right principle motivate him to be obedient to God above all.
cloud144000 2 years ago
So he was not created with a moral weakness, so he didnt lacked the ability to make sound decisions or to withstand temptation. He was made perfect in Gods standards. Now to the point of FATE as you also make reference too it was Adams choice to make the decision. Even 1 Timothy 2:14 says "Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and came to be in transgression." So he diliberatly sinned knowing that he was doing something wrong and knowing there would be a consequence
cloud144000 2 years ago
Talking about FATE and the fact that you say God set them up. would be opening up a whole new subject which would refer to many parts of the bible so whenever where done with A&E we can talk about fate.
cloud144000 2 years ago
I myself understand that theres alot of points I dont hit in my comments back and that by stateing something you can always come up with more disagreements or more questions. But simply put God created adam perfect to his standards and so when they sinned they where guilty in Gods perfect justice. How are we to judge God in something he knows 100% about when we only come to usumptions as to saying they didnt know or they couldnt make the right choice. God knows they could thats why there guilty.
cloud144000 2 years ago
@cloud144000
see, i don't quite follow how you can say:
"how are we to judge" and
"we can only make assumptions"
but don't hold back assuming: God knows they could thats why there guilty
more to follow.
mindwis3 1 year ago
@cloud...
You are right when you say that i'll come with more questions.
I am a person that questions, whereas you seem to seem to accept unquestioned.
well, to each it's own...
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3
Sorry, the new comment box got me :)
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 I do assume that this is true But in this case im only stateing that this is what the bible teaches and only that.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 If you read the bible it teaches that God is just. That adam and eve where created to his perfect standards giveing them free will. If they where in some way defective then Gods judgement on them would not have been just. I do have a lot of questions myself but I actually find the answers not just wallow in confusion... but as you say to each his own.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000 (1)
" If you read the bible it teaches that God is just." ..Dear cloud, i have read the bible, so i can say that according to my standards, god is NOT just. (2Ki2 for example).
Besides, if you think god is all merciful too, then he cannot be all just, since mercy is less punishment than justified..
"but I actually find the answers" .. i disagree, i think you make up answers and think you found them..... (cont.2)
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 ... one more thing i only stated that there can be more questions but for this topic my comment should have answered your question unless you choose not to believe then thats your personal choice.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000 (2)
" my comment should have answered your question unless you choose not to believe"
Hmmm, you gave me your view, but not an answer...
and i cannot "choose not to believe" (or choose to believe)....
For me, "believing" is not a matter of choice, but a product of reasoning.
If convincing evidence is presented, i will be convinced, and if flimsy wishful thinking is presented, then flimsy wishful thinking is what i see ....
(cont. 3)
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 When I say that "we can only make ssumptions" I say it in regards to what we believe while on the other hand the bible gives us the answer... theres no need to make assumptions. I didnt jump the gun by saying that that God knows they could thats why there guilty... its very clear that the bible teaches this. which by the way is the topic at hand and the bible is the source of the conversation.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000 (3)
You still fail to see the crux of the matter. (get your feet back onto the ground dear man).
If someone does not speak english, you can tell him in english NOT to read the english-whatever dictionary....
Just DON'T be surprized if he does not understand what you said untill after translating it WITH that very dictionary
Of course, the trap (the tree in the middle) was all part of the perfect plan, and even the snake played it's part :)
mindwis3 1 year ago
@cloud144000 (3)
i think you still fail to see the crux of the matter.
If someone does not speak english, you can tell him in english NOT to read the english-whatever dictionary....
Just DON'T be surprized if he does not understand what you said untill after translating it WITH that very dictionary
Of course, the trap (the tree in the middle) was all part of the perfect plan, and even the snake played it's part :)
I understand your view Cloud,i just don't share it.
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 I do understand your point and through out my comments I answer that very question in detail. You fail to grasp it and I think you need to study some more. The bible never says that Humans where made to fail they where made for a very different purpose. Im sorry but I cannot share your view in saying that it was a set up or part of a plan which of course im willing to open this topic for discussion as well.. The bible does not teach this, its only a mans(aka you) opinion/assumption.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
"The bible does not teach this, its only a mans(aka you) opinion/assumption. "
Every take on the bible is an 'opinion' dear Cloud, and that includes yours.
Either the plan was for man to fall, or the plan is not perfect.
Now, before 'the fall', the animals were already equiped for after the fall, a lion has teeth to eat other animals
The bible also states that awareness of i.e. shame did not happen until after they ate the fruit. That means that such awareness was not there before
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 This is where your mistaken ive quoted every scripture I needed to that clearly states this. NOT MY OPINION. Yet you continue to use that as a way to make your point. You on the other hand have no biblical backing only speculative views. They didnt have shame because they where perfect. They had nothing to be ashamed of. Shame is not needed to make a correct choice its only the outcome of a bad one.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000 (4)
Right cloud, when i read it, it's an opinion, and when you read it, it is fact.... sure..
You're assuming i have no knowledge of the bible, but you're quite wrong.
The shame they felt is because they were now aware because of knewly gained knowledge.
My example stands....cont.5
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 So your saying when you read a verse its an opinion.... Interesting. I didnt assume anything about your knowledge of the scriptures hahaha. Im just letting you know that if you want to talk about the bible they way you are it would be good to hear you quote some scriptures as your foundation otherwise its comeing from your mouth and not really what the bible says.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 ok so Let me ask you a question. So you think the tree is what exactly? What did they gain by eating the tree?
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
"ok so Let me ask you a question. So you think the tree is what exactly? What did they gain by eating the tree?"
i just told you, but why not read genesis 3 again ?>
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad. (Ge 3:22) What they gained was moral independence from God. God had already told them what was right and what was wrong they had that knowledge of good and bad but by takeing from the fruit they lost Gods favor and connection and they became moraly independent.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
"God had already told them what was right and what was wrong" - i did not know this, quote please (and hurry buddy).
"they became moraly independent" and righty so, since god's moral compas is way off. (Deut 22:28-29, where a girl has to marry her rapist.....or is that the "justice" you speak of?
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 And Jehovah God proceeded to take the man and settle him in the garden of E′den to cultivate it and to take care of it. 16 And Jehovah God also laid this command upon the man: From every tree of the garden you may eat to satisfaction. 17 But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
That's what makes you say "God had already told them what was right and what was wrong", that's the k nowledge of "good and evil" ?
Come on dude, you're not serious here, are you ?
That is no knowledge of good and evil, that's utting english to someone who does not understand that language. How were they to evaluate his "command" ?
Let me guess, "might makes right"..
"your money or your life" is free will right ?
wrong.......
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Adam and Eve were created upright and were told of the course that would mean life, but they sought out another plan, acted ruinously on their own, and became defective. Eccl. 7:29; Deut. 32:5)
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
"Adam and Eve were created upright and were told of the course that would mean life"
Very well, but if you claim that, then you loose "omniscience", you know that right?
So god is no longer able to know the future.
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Not exactly God has the ability to foreknow events, but the Bible shows that he makes selective and discretionary use of that ability, with due regard for the free will with which he has endowed his human creation.—Compare Genesis 22:12; 18:20, 21.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
" with due regard for the free will with which he has endowed his human creation"
Ooow, that's so old, and it's not true either.
Free will in and of itself already negates anyones ability to 'foresee' anything.
You cannot both have determinism and free will.
If free will existsm choice is open and therefore that choice is not foreseeable (else the choice is already fixed, and therefore free will is out the door).
You'll have to choose. (cont. in "Free".).
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 (Free).
And moreover, telling someone not to eat from a fruit or else, IS already messing with someones free will.
And don't confuse "having free will" with "executing free will".
I think i'll make a video just for you, since talking is more lazy then writing :)
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Rev. 22:17: Let anyone hearing say: Come! And let anyone thirsting come; let anyone that wishes take lifes water free. (The choice is not foreordained; it is left to the individual.)
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
"The choice is not foreordained; it is left to the individual."
It does not matter if the choice was or was not foreseen.
What matters is, can things be foreseen, if so then choices are fixed, an illusion.
It does not even matter if god himself can foresee, all that's needed to render free choice a farce is forseeability, not if it actually was foreseen.
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Turn back, please, every one from his bad way and from the badness of your dealings . . . that I may not cause calamity to you. (Jeremiah 25:5, 6) This appeal would be pointless if God had already fixed each individuals destiny. Moreover, Gods Word states: Repent, therefore, and turn around so as to get your sins blotted out, that seasons of refreshing may come from the person of God. (Acts 3:19)
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Wrong... "forseeablitiy" does not render free choice a farce. I can forsee that the sun will rise tommarow but do I make it happen haha no. An astronomer can foretell when a certain comet is going to streak through the sky, or when there will be an eclipse of the sun or moon. Does his foreknowledge of the comets visit or the eclipse make such things happen?
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 God can either look into or refrain from looking into our mind, can either foresee the course our mind will direct us into or withhold such knowledge from himself. In any event, we are created free moral agents and use that freedom as we choose.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 When you have close friends and learn their mannerisms or mental tendencies or peculiarities, you often know in advance what they will do under certain circumstances. But your foreknowledge due to insight into their personalities does not force them to so act, does it? They still act of their own free will, unmaneuvered and uncoerced by your foreknowledge, do they not?
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
"They still act of their own free will, unmaneuvered and uncoerced by your foreknowledge, do they not?"
Sure they do, but that is not foreseeing, that's guessing what someone will do.
That's not comparable to knowing the outcome of a choice.
...cont..
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Forknowledge is the synonym of foresee. I think the outcome of this convo would be what you believe foreseeing is... I would love for you to give your definition of foresee so that I can see where your comeing from.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 If God foreordained and foreknew Adams sin and all that would result from this, it would mean that by creating Adam, God deliberately set in motion all the wickedness committed in human history. He would be the Source of all the wars, the crime, the immorality, the oppression, the lying, the hypocrisy, the disease. But the Bible clearly says: You are not a God taking delight in wickedness. (Ps. 5:4)
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000 ....cont....
Isaiah 46:10
"the One telling from the beginning the finale"
Again, it's irrelevant if he does or does not always preordain or foresee.
The fact that the future is foreseeable renders free will (choice) pointless as there is 100% chance of once choice being the outcome, and 0% of any other choice being chosen.
now ""the One telling from the beginning the finale",
Do you claim this means God did NOT know the outcome from the beginning ?
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Well what begginning is he refering too and what finale? Maybe you can share your thoughts on this subject.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Rom. 2:4, 5: Do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and long-suffering, because you do not know that the kindly quality of God is trying to lead you to repentance? But according to your hardness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and of the revealing of Gods righteous judgment. (There is no forcing of individuals to pursue a prescribed course. But there is accountability for what one does.)
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 This is what the love of God means, that we observe his commandments. (1 John 5:3)
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
"This is what the love of God means, that we observe his commandments"
So, God shows his love by demanding to be worshipped.
Sounds more like a "loverboy" to me to be honest, but if that's "love" to you, by all means, go for it.
And don;t forget to explain how i.e. 2Ki2 is "just"...
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 wow... did you just say that lol.... Gods commandments are for our benefit... . What the scripture is saying is that Love FOR God means that we observe his commandments. So adam and eve showed the lack of love for God when they disaboyed him. the bible clearly describes love i can give you that scripture if you dont know it.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Did God know adam and eve would sin? Would you encourage your children to undertake a project with a marvelous future, knowing from the start that it was doomed to failure? Would you warn them of harm, while knowing that you had planned everything so that they were sure to come to grief? Is it reasonable, then, to attribute such to God?
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Matt. 7:11: If you, although being wicked [or, bad as you are, NE], know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will your Father who is in the heavens give good things to those asking him?
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Here is what God set before Adam and Eve: Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving upon the earth. (Gen. 1:28; 2:16, 17) point being that God a purpose for them ... they sinned on there own not according to plan and ruined that.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
Tell me Cloud, how would eating of the fruit get in the way of any of that?
And tell me how the plan then changed?
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 What I would like to see is some scriptures that would back up your IDEAS on a PLAN. I disagree with you completely on the plan aspect of humans. They where not made to fail, they had a purpose.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 I would also like to see scriptures that back up all your ideas. If you want to talk about the bible you better be quick on quoting from it buddy. I understand that many aspects are opinions BUT when i qoute scriptures that clearly say God is just etc then thats what the bible teaches not my opinion.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
" you better be quick on quoting from it buddy."
... pff or else, fire and brimstone ? take it easy son...
I already gave you 2Ki2, if that is not enough injustice, then there's plenty more where that came from.
"when i qoute scriptures that clearly say God is just etc" ....
..yeah, and when i quote scripture where god is clearly not "just", then you say it's 'just an opinion'.
READ 2Ki2 and explain how that brutal passage shows a 'just' god.
(cont 6).
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 haha no, no fire nor brimstone... its only going to make your argument very weak.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 one last thing... I really want a scripture that says they werent "AWARE" of things... Its true that they where ashamed after they sinned but that doesnt prove to me that they lacked awareness of the outcome for there actions.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@cloud144000
" doesnt prove to me that they lacked awareness of the outcome for there actions"
really, tell me, ad they ever experienced anything like "death" ? was that something that existed there?
It was the tree of knowledge of good and evil (try Gen 3:5).
Or try 3:7 "And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves girdles."
their eyes were opened after eating, it's right there, that's an "opnion" ?
mindwis3 1 year ago
@mindwis3 No thats not an opinion ... the opinion is you saying that this in one way or another PROVES that God made humans only to fail.. saying that God set them up. Thats an opinion.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 Remember they where created perfect to Gods standards and if hes just then judgeing them incorrectly would go agaisnt God and the bible. If what your saying is true that they where in some way lacking sense/awareness that would lead them to make a negitive choice ... then God would not have acted in Justice.
cloud144000 1 year ago
@mindwis3 In all honesty I ask that you read all my comments again and come to understand that this "dictionary" you speak of didnt exist in the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They already had it. You continue to think that adam and eve where in same way lacking something... when they where not.
cloud144000 1 year ago
It is the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence by which man refuses to recognise his status as a created being. The first sin was an attack on Gods sovereignty, a sin of pride.
cloud144000 2 years ago
"The first sin was an attack on Gods sovereignty, a sin of pride"
Come on, how can you even claim it was an attack.
A&E were like children, and they were duped by the dupe master into eating from the fruit, how you can even blame them is beyond me.
They were not warned for satan and then they (and we) get punished severely where satan was not.
Dude, you really need to re-evaluate your take.
I might be wrong, but in my view you're even more wrong ;)
Besides it was all part of gods plan anyway.
mindwis3 2 years ago
Loved the video... I miss your video making :3
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
the grandma bicycle is distracting me.:D
chiku0009 2 years ago
hehehe ;)
I guess you've been to Holland then ?
mindwis3 2 years ago
nee nooit.Lol
chiku0009 2 years ago
en gelukkig 2010.En niet zoveel filosoferen:D
chiku0009 2 years ago
OMG I feel like I'm at university again drooling over this really cool, confident, enlightened professor that makes me want to learn . . . FROM HIM!! Hah, look at the bike *giggles* naked in the garden
wysiwyg43 2 years ago
You have it right mindwis3.
Adam and Eve(like children) were supposed to be two sentient cognitive beings who have no knowledge or awareness of good and evil(sin) but was instructed by a god character not to eat from the tree which would enlighten them. In other words; the god character arranged it so that only after they eat from the forbidden tree are they capable of understanding that eating from the tree was in fact a sin. An unjust and immoral thing to do by a all loving god.
Katalyzt
Katalyzt 2 years ago
Do you have a brother???
itchycoopark2 2 years ago
@itchycoopark sistah why you pushin up on the white man? he'll put you in chains, beat you and call you kizzy. .....but he is kinda hot. i'm with you. he can sit on my face ANY day. thanks
hedcourters 2 years ago
Although this man is handsome...let us focus on his message. he has alot to say other than his looks ;)
vallie05 2 years ago
Here are a few ironic Adam & Eve questions for Christians.
1. Why would a "perfect" god, who created women & men to be fruitful and multiply, make them shameful over being nude?
2. Since Adam & Eve were not created covered with animal skins, why would an omnipresent and all-knowing god incorporate shame into their thinking, and how could this be of value to them when they were made for each other?
3. How does the knowledge of good and evil make Adam & Eve shameful about their naked bodies?
Lisa3679 2 years ago
If Adam and Eve didn't get kicked out of the Garden you and I wouldn't be even around to have a discussion.
When there is no death, there can't be any cell death (that my interpretation at least) thus there can't be any sexual reproduction as that would lead to the demise of many sperm cells who couldn't fertilize an egg.
But then the creation story itself is conflicting as genesis 1 & 2 contradict each other on how things were created.
WeekendTuber 2 years ago
Why didn't I think of that?
maxpolaris99 2 years ago
If i only knew what "that" was....
Saying that, does bring me back to that song , 'reenacting' the "why didn't i think of that" a naturalist, whose name forgot, said when he read on the origin of species...
watch?v=GrIN8ptMmug
Rgds+thanks maxpolaris99
mindwis3 2 years ago
adam & eve were not IGNORANT!
herpesstud 2 years ago
Hey 2ups in one day. Are you going for a hattrick?
Anyways. Thinking of all the ilogical moronic and incoherent things about the bible is in my view to torment yourself. An easy way to "explain" the fall of humankind would be this...
God made Adam in his own image.
Later on he made Eve to keep him company.
Just think. God would be a man. " men and one women.....
Of course they got kicked out when Eve picked Adam.
dalkordigo 2 years ago
hahaha, that's funny ;)
Yeah, i did not think of that, but it does explain why god presented adam with all the animals before presenting eve to him ;)
Good stuff Dalkordigo
mindwis3 2 years ago
"the mere fact that ur talking about adam and eve like if they REALLY existed marks you as a believer"
Hey Uragan, thanks for your take on things.....
I'm slightly disappointed you didn't bring any new insights, but well, i cannot expect too much of the first comment i guess ;)
Like you said a while ago, you're waiting to see me slip, hehehe.
Well, not quite yet i guess :)
Take care dude.
mindwis3 2 years ago
this seems like a failed attempt at atheism...
the mere fact that ur talking about adam and eve like if they REALLY existed marks you as a believer.
Uragan 2 years ago