A Question For Trinitarians.

[solderz 0]

Isn't the snake the hero in this story? Was it really bad that we gained knowledge? The bible actually makes a lot more sense when seen as a tool being used by God to help get us back to our original, unenlightened, selves. Lucifer, the morning star, (a classic protagonist in this story) is actually quite heroic throughout the bible. He stands up to an evil god that threatens mankind with an eternity of torture unless we bow down and kiss his feet. Too bad he didn't win. Would have made for a better ending.

[Balloon guy 158]

That's good thinking there.'If only satan had won..the world would be such a better place.'

[Greatest I am 0]

Snake badLie to EveGod not happySatan lieDL not follow common usage of wordsSo DL must use name calling, because DL is not deep

You make statement no detail. Poor debate. many useless post. Good debate back up statement when make. That adult way.Less e mail unless you just go by count to feel good.What lie Satan do?What lie talking snake do?Talking snake & tree of knowledge supposed to stay always with man.Where they be?RegardsDL

[Greatest I am 0]

That's good thinking there.'If only satan had won..the world would be such a better place.'

Yes yes. No genocide of man.Satan cure not kill.That God like to kill instead of cure like He can. Bad God instead of good doctor.Pill better than much water for children and bad bad babies, yes.RegardsDL

[Jeepster80125 0]

Yes yes. No genocide of man.Satan cure not kill.That God like to kill instead of cure like He can. Bad God instead of good doctor.Pill better than much water for children and bad bad babies, yes.RegardsDL

This is just so fucking weird.Luke 7:12?Mark 9:13?

[Greatest I am 0]

This is just so fucking weird.Luke 7:12?Mark 9:13?

Yes. Only a weird God kills instead of cure.Immoral too.RegardsDL

[Balloon guy 158]

One day you will post something that is coherent and is actually based on an original thought of your own and not the same old tired and poorly thought out 'arguments' that have been debunked everyday for centuries, yet still make it into books bought by the willing sheep who have issues with the notion that they aren't the center of the universe.When that day comes, I will respond to you.Until then I will enjoy my life, watch my grandchildren grow up, probably see the first remake of the Lord of the Rings by Peter Jackson's kid and be completely at ease with my faith, knowing that people like you have failed for thousands of years to find excuses why you can discount it, yet never accept the truth staring them straight in the face.Good luck

[CaneBrain 95]

And the winner is GreatestIAm by virtue of BG's forfeit.

[Balloon guy 158]

And the winner is GreatestIAm by virtue of BG's forfeit.

And is prize is...you guys.Enjoy

[davezz5 0]

Not really.All they say is :"One lie..one lie and here I am crawling on my belly. It's not fair.Pretty much all whiners.

Thats a start. Shouldn't be too hard to train it up.

[BaseJester 1]

Snake badLie to EveGod not happySatan lie

You have become some accustomed to a thought process of choosing a belief and then filtering and bending all evidence to that unwavering belief that you apply that thought process to the supposed source of your belief system.

[Greatest I am 0]

One day you will post something that is coherent and is actually based on an original thought of your own and not the same old tired and poorly thought out 'arguments' that have been debunked everyday for centuries, yet still make it into books bought by the willing sheep who have issues with the notion that they aren't the center of the universe.When that day comes, I will respond to you.Until then I will enjoy my life, watch my grandchildren grow up, probably see the first remake of the Lord of the Rings by Peter Jackson's kid and be completely at ease with my faith, knowing that people like you have failed for thousands of years to find excuses why you can discount it, yet never accept the truth staring them straight in the face.Good luck

What!!!You are an adult!RegardsDL

[Balloon guy 158]

You have become some accustomed to a thought process of choosing a belief and then filtering and bending all evidence to that unwavering belief that you apply that thought process to the supposed source of your belief system.

No, I know the full context of the what the Bible says.So when someone tries to pull out one small verse and then try to build a picture of God from it, I see their attempts at shallow logic for what they are.In this case the person isn't even making a standard argument because nobody tries to argue what he is trying to argue from that verse except people who only read that verse then decide what it really means, while refusing to see who said it.You got held up with this argument because you at least read the later verses and tried to make an argument. I get your point, but you refuse to apply the exact same logic to the other tree, because that would ruin your point. You also take liberty to describe what it means to have knowledge of good and evil. You can't make the case that they didn't know right from wrong because Eve clearly expressed doubt about breaking God's rules. So you took an esoteric license and like this op are trying to say that this knowledge is actually good for us.Even though the author of that exact idea was satan, you are trying to argue that he was right.I know the whole Bible, I see what you are saying from that context, therefore I disagree with it completely.At least unlike this op, you did not try to make us hate God for forcing snakes to have to crawl on their belly, like this is some great evil that no animal should have the indignity of having to endure. The Bible never does go into details what the alligator did to get stuck on his belly too, but I bet it was really awful.

[Greatest I am 0]

No, I know the full context of the what the Bible says.So when someone tries to pull out one small verse and then try to build a picture of God from it, I see their attempts at shallow logic for what they are.In this case the person isn't even making a standard argument because nobody tries to argue what he is trying to argue from that verse except people who only read that verse then decide what it really means, while refusing to see who said it.You got held up with this argument because you at least read the later verses and tried to make an argument. I get your point, but you refuse to apply the exact same logic to the other tree, because that would ruin your point. You also take liberty to describe what it means to have knowledge of good and evil. You can't make the case that they didn't know right from wrong because Eve clearly expressed doubt about breaking God's rules. So you took an esoteric license and like this op are trying to say that this knowledge is actually good for us.Even though the author of that exact idea was satan, you are trying to argue that he was right.I know the whole Bible, I see what you are saying from that context, therefore I disagree with it completely.At least unlike this op, you did not try to make us hate God for forcing snakes to have to crawl on their belly, like this is some great evil that no animal should have the indignity of having to endure. The Bible never does go into details what the alligator did to get stuck on his belly too, but I bet it was really awful.

Good distortion of the issue of the snakes punishment.My point was that if the snake was under Satan's control then it was unjustly punished. It did not wrong.If it was just a snake and lied on it's own, then where did it learn to speak human?As a parent, how much knowledge of any kind would you deny your children.I personally would deny nothing in the way of knowledge because they may need it to defend or protect themselves from harm such as belief in talking animals.Look what it has done to your thinking processes.RegardsDL

[Balloon guy 158]

Good distortion of the issue of the snakes punishment.My point was that if the snake was under Satan's control then it was unjustly punished. It did not wrong.If it was just a snake and lied on it's own, then where did it learn to speak human?As a parent, how much knowledge of any kind would you deny your children.I personally would deny nothing in the way of knowledge because they may need it to defend or protect themselves from harm such as belief in talking animals.Look what it has done to your thinking processes.RegardsDL

The knowledge to build a dirty bomb? How about the knowledge to mix up common household cleaners into lethal gasses to kill large groups of people?I assume you let your children watch snuff films, they need to know these things.Or were you just being shallow again?

[Jeepster80125 0]

Good distortion of the issue of the snakes punishment.My point was that if the snake was under Satan's control then it was unjustly punished. It did not wrong.If it was just a snake and lied on it's own, then where did it learn to speak human?As a parent, how much knowledge of any kind would you deny your children.I personally would deny nothing in the way of knowledge because they may need it to defend or protect themselves from harm such as belief in talking animals.Look what it has done to your thinking processes.RegardsDL

I wish you spoke human.

[BaseJester 1]

No, I know the full context of the what the Bible says.

We're saying the same thing here with different spin. It's pretty odd to me to think that God would inspire a document whose meaning was hidden for thousands of years. Did the Hebrews have any chance of understanding Genesis as explaining their need for salvation? If not, why was God ****ing with them? If so, then the reader doesn't need the "context" of books written in the future to understand it. How do you know that no future book holds the key to understanding the New Testament, you're getting it all wrong, and by "give to the poor" Jesus really meant **** a lot of whores? I'd hope that you'd respond that you have faith that God isn't a tricky dickweed and he wouldn't do that. Can you apply that here and try to understand Genesis in its own context?

You got held up with this argument because you at least read the later verses and tried to make an argument. I get your point, but you refuse to apply the exact same logic to the other tree, because that would ruin your point.

OK, I'll entertain that.

They didn't need to eat from the tree of life in order to live, why would they need to eat from other tree to know right from wrong?

I'll grant you that the name of the tree doesn't tell us the whole story. It does point us in the right direction, which is then explicitly spelled out in both cases. We don't have to guess or interpret what either tree does.

22Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"-- 23therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken.

The fruit of the trees have effects that are consistent with their names in both cases.

You also take liberty to describe what it means to have knowledge of good and evil. You can't make the case that they didn't know right from wrong because Eve clearly expressed doubt about breaking God's rules. So you took an esoteric license and like this op are trying to say that this knowledge is actually good for us.

I don't think that I am. A small child or pet can understand rules and choose to follow them because they have been told do so by an authority without making a moral judgment based on their own consciences. Adam and Eve know that God has forbidden them to eat from the tree, but they don't what evil is. Edited July 20, 2010 by BaseJester

[nickforgot 0]

Greatest I am is a fucking moron

[brvheart 1,751]

Genesis 3

Dangit BJ, NASV!

[Greatest I am 0]

The knowledge to build a dirty bomb? How about the knowledge to mix up common household cleaners into lethal gasses to kill large groups of people?

So you would deny them physics and chemistry.They are both used in most sciences today and generally include math.You would deny your children almost all science then?How Catholic of you.RegardsDL

[Greatest I am 0]

I wish you spoke human.

They say that those who know more than one language have a hard time being understood.If I can clarify any point for you, just name it.The above though has been understood by most. You just have to read slowly and watch out for the way I use commas. I do write in a strange way but only to some.I find it strange when I get accused of something by one and then see others come in to explain it to the one who complained.Since I am sometimes controversial, so of the complaint are just bitches because they have no rebuttal to the logic and are just too stupid to understand simple concepts.Not pointing a finger. Just saying.Beiing irreverent does not help me but I like it.RegardsDL

[Greatest I am 0]

We're saying the same thing here with different spin. It's pretty odd to me to think that God would inspire a document whose meaning was hidden for thousands of years. Did the Hebrews have any chance of understanding Genesis as explaining their need for salvation? If not, why was God ****ing with them? If so, then the reader doesn't need the "context" of books written in the future to understand it. How do you know that no future book holds the key to understanding the New Testament, you're getting it all wrong, and by "give to the poor" Jesus really meant **** a lot of whores? I'd hope that you'd respond that you have faith that God isn't a tricky dickweed and he wouldn't do that. Can you apply that here and try to understand Genesis in its own context? OK, I'll entertain that.I'll grant you that the name of the tree doesn't tell us the whole story. It does point us in the right direction, which is then explicitly spelled out in both cases. We don't have to guess or interpret what either tree does. The fruit of the trees have effects that are consistent with their names in both cases. I don't think that I am. A small child or pet can understand that their rules and choose to follow them because they have been told do so by an authority without making a moral judgment based on their own consciences. Adam and Eve know that God has forbidden them to eat from the tree, but they don't what evil is.

If I may interject.The tree of life is not the tree of plain old life. It is the tree of eternal life. A huge difference. Hence God’s point in denying it to man.“why would they need to eat from other tree to know right from wrong?”Because you might note in Eden that all Adam did to that point was name animals but could not make moral judgments. No knowledge of good and evil.That is why they clothed themselves right after eating of it. They became aware of proper protocols. “Eve clearly expressed doubt about breaking God's rules.”No. She repeated Gods words and did not express doubt. The talking snake did by saying you will not surely die. You might note that she did not so it was not a lie.God did lie by telling her she would.RegardsDL

[Greatest I am 0]

Greatest I am is a fucking moron

Bite me.

[vbnautilus 48]

Beiing irreverent does not help me but I like it.

I think the problem is more serious for you than you may understand. If we are to believe that your purpose is really to change people's minds (which is basically what you have told me) then your attitude and style is clearly counter-productive. That's why I continue to question your motivation. It does not seem that you are truly attempting to communicate with anyone. It seems rather that you are just trying to entertain yourself, doesn't it?

[Roll the Bones 74]

I think the problem is more serious for you than you may understand. If we are to believe that your purpose is really to change people's minds (which is basically what you have told me) then your attitude and style is clearly counter-productive. That's why I continue to question your motivation. It does not seem that you are truly attempting to communicate with anyone. It seems rather that you are just trying to entertain yourself, doesn't it?

I've tried to read his posts but can never follow along. It gets too difficult since he has awful sentence structure, lack of punctuation, and other problems. I mean, for me to criticize someone for this has to mean that hell froze over.