Satan. Created By God Perfect And Good Or Evil?

[Balloon guy 158]

I would so be joining this discussion & others if it weren't for that douchebag stuffing his ignorant close-minded nose in every discussion thread. Someone get that gia banned so we can have clean nice philosophical/religious discussions about interesting topics again. The point is you can make all the sense in the world and verbally murder this guy, he's just set on his close-minded crap somehow and nothing in the world can change his mind. He's just that kind of person that even if God personally came to him and showed him the truth he's one of those guys who still would dismiss it as irrational and check himself into a mental clinic (which isn't a bad idea either way).

But Vbnautilus has other qualities that we like.I can't think of what they are exactly, but I remember someone alluding to them once. A long time ago.And besides, he spells and uses weird words correctly, et al.Just don't mention Jews, he is very anti-semantics!

[vbnautilus 48]

I would so be joining this discussion & others if it weren't for that douchebag stuffing his ignorant close-minded nose in every discussion thread. Someone get that gia banned so we can have clean nice philosophical/religious discussions about interesting topics again. The point is you can make all the sense in the world and verbally murder this guy, he's just set on his close-minded crap somehow and nothing in the world can change his mind. He's just that kind of person that even if God personally came to him and showed him the truth he's one of those guys who still would dismiss it as irrational and check himself into a mental clinic (which isn't a bad idea either way).

At least my screen name isn't too long to fit next to my posts!

[Balloon guy 158]

But Vbnautilus has other qualities that we like.I can't think of what they are exactly, but I remember someone alluding to them once. A long time ago.And besides, he spells and uses weird words correctly, et al.Just don't mention Jews, he is very anti-semantics!

At least my screen name isn't too long to fit next to my posts!

THAT was it. Thanks vb.

[Greatest I am 0]

Okay..the universe

I knew how you would approach that question.Like this link.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tqYUTjQIc0You do that every time we speak.You might want to refine your empty arguments.RegardsDL

[Greatest I am 0]

I don't see it that way. A murderer, having slaughtered 100 people and and ate all of them with his bare hands, was still created perfect and IS still perfect, as far as his created form goes. Who he is now is entirely his own choosing, rightly so. As far as I know from a biblical point of view we were created with the express intent to serve God but don't have to, if we don't want to. If that isn't a perfect creation from an entity who had the power to create robots I don't know what is. Think about- you could snap your fingers and create that which has no other choice but to be what you want it to be and instead you give up that control and GIVE IT TO THE CREATION INSTEAD. That's a powerful statement.

Perhaps but unfortunately, you base it on a lie by saying God offers or gave us freedom of choice.Do it my way is not free will. it is a threat.Free will God style.

If God gave a hoot about the free will that He supposedly gave us, He sure is an Indian giver all over the O T where He tramples all over man’s free will to live as He went about killing us at Sodom and using genocide on us in Noah‘s day. Your God is anhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78H-tRFShiYSung by God's victims. RegardsDL

[Greatest I am 0]

Say DL, why do you often attach that little image of jesus to your posts?How do you decide which posts to attach it to?

It is a mood thing.I like this one as it matches the Bible description to a T.Check the language. You will agree I think.I found a picture of God/Adam/Jesus/Eve.Now I know what this means.Genesis 1:27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.Genesis 1:26-28Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.RegardsDL

[BaseJester 1]

What is the nature of God that we achieved? If God says we are like Him, what does that mean? you would need to know what the nature of God is, and what we were before to answer that.Were we exactly how we are now, but without any concept of good and evil? What does that mean?Taking a simplistic approach and stating that our knowledge of morality came from eating the tree requires you to explain what we changed from.

I want to make clear that I'm not asserting that eating the fruit of a tree actually granted knowledge of good and evil to mankind. I am merely asserting that this is what the bible says, and it plainly does say that. If you choose not to believe that, I'm find with that. I'm not OK with you calling your disbelief the only valid interpretation or an interpretation at all, really. It's not. So, again.

1. The author of Genesis calls the tree the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
2. Adam and Eve eat the fruit.
3. God says they now have the knowledge of good and evil.

Why don't you believe this?

Whereas applying the same logic of the Tree of Life: that we had eternal life, lost it and could have regained it, and applying it to the other tree fits much better with both a literary and a spiritual explanation.You guys are leaving this question completely unanswered. And in order to do this, you must take a clear and simple story about man's fall from grace and turn it into one where we were ignorant and blind but now we are better.

I don't think better is exactly the case. The story is trying to explain, imho, why and how man living in the context of a society is different from the other woodland creatures. The lilies of the field are not defective because they lack knowledge of good and evil. They are less like God than man, though, with different burdens and blessings.

It would be no different than using a story of a child who goes to a candy store and one of the candy makers tells him to eat all the candy in the store because it will make him feel good, but his father tells him to not eat before his dinner.But the kid listens to the person with an ulterior motive, eats the candy and gets sick.Then his father nurses him back and explains that eating good food is how you were meant to grow, not filling up on sugar.And now you are arguing that the guy who told him to eat the candy was right, because candy is good.

Err, no. I'm not arguing that the snake is right because knowledge is good. I'm arguing that the snake is right in the story -- at least as far as he goes -- because Genesis says that he is.

You miss the whole point of the story, and you are refusing to see how this crystal clear message explains the story better than picking one verse and building an entire theory around it.

It's not a theory; it's what the words say. Really, your "theory" (in which the fruit of the Knowledge of Good & Evil does NOT grant knowledge of good & evil, but instead ONLY kills you) is based on absolutely nothing in Genesis. Nothing. Zero verses. None. Disagree? Then quote the verses. Parts of the creation are listed twice in Genesis for no apparent reason. And yet, you're arguing that the most important part of understanding Genesis, God left for us to infer. Why? If I need to know that the serpent is Satan, why not, you know, mention that? If I need to know that man was originally immortal, why not, you know, mention that? If I need to know that God was temporarily insane when he SAID that the tree granted knowledge of good & evil, why not, you know, mention that?

[Greatest I am 0]

Ye are Gods.Well, there's one way to settle this, and that is, let's hear it from Yahweh himself. Today, brothers and sisters, we open the Good Book to Genesis chapter 3, verse 22:22. And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:I think in 3:22 God spells it out loud: yes, the snake had told the truth. Yes, in eating from that tree humans had become like God, by being being able to tell good from evil.I mean, hey, if you can't trust the LORD himself about it, who can you trust, eh? RegardsDL

[Balloon guy 158]

I want to make clear that I'm not asserting that eating the fruit of a tree actually granted knowledge of good and evil to mankind. I am merely asserting that this is what the bible says, and it plainly does say that. If you choose not to believe that, I'm find with that. I'm not OK with you calling your disbelief the only valid interpretation or an interpretation at all, really. It's not. So, again.

1. The author of Genesis calls the tree the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
2. Adam and Eve eat the fruit.
3. God says they now have the knowledge of good and evil.

Why don't you believe this?

It's not that I don't believe this, it's that of the two explanations of the end results of eating the fruit, one of them is from God, and one of them is from the devil. I am focused on what God said, which is that this tree was forbidden, and eating the fruit will cause death.You are focusing on what the devil said, that there is a reward for eating the fruit.Because the partner tree in this story is also called something that is not the source for it's name, meaning the tree's purpose/name is not the only way to gain the knowledge or the life...I can also conclude that the knowledge of good and evil was not released from the fruit. The fact that the result of the eating of the fruit from God's rules was death, but they didn't die right away, so the death was the introduction of death into their life. Meaning they weren't going to die before they ate the fruit. After they sinned, they began dying. So they had eternal life seperate from the Tree of Life's fruit.If they already had eternal life, then the Tree of Life was not the only source of this.

I don't think better is exactly the case. The story is trying to explain, imho, why and how man living in the context of a society is different from the other woodland creatures. The lilies of the field are not defective because they lack knowledge of good and evil. They are less like God than man, though, with different burdens and blessings.

I don't see this interpretation. From a larger perspective of the message of the Bible, this is completely off message. The simple big picture here is that this is the time and place where sin was introduced to mankind.

Err, no. I'm not arguing that the snake is right because knowledge is good. I'm arguing that the snake is right in the story -- at least in right in part -- because Genesis says that he is.

But the reason the serpent told them what he told them was to get them to disobey God. When he asked Eve what God said, she lied about what He said, saying that not only could they not eat of it, but they couldn't even touch it. The serpent says that's not true, so she eats it, and she begins dying. The only thing God told them was that they would die if they ate it. They did. The serpent said they wouldn't die, but they would become like God. Well he was wrong about the first thing, what does the second thing mean?

It's not a theory; it's what the words say. Really, your "theory" (in which the fruit of the Knowledge of Good & Evil does NOT grant knowledge of good & evil, but instead ONLY kills you) is based on absolutely nothing in Genesis. Nothing. Zero verses. None.

Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

Parts of the creation are listed twice in Genesis for no apparent reason. And yet, you're arguing that the most important part of understanding Genesis, God left for us to infer. Why? If I need to know that the serpent is Satan, why not, you know, mention that? If I need to know that man was originally immortal, why not, you know, mention that? If I need to know that God was temporarily insane when he SAID that the tree granted knowledge of good & evil, why not, you know, mention that?

They were in paradise, everything was perfect, animals lived next to each other without killing each other, no pain, no death no problems. Because they didn't mention parts of it is not conclusive proof that it didn't exist.I already have stated that the only way to infer from the fact that the consequences of disobeying God was dying, this means that they must not have been dying, or they had eternal life.Eve lied to the serpent about what God said by adding that they 'couldn't even touch the tree', so she wasn't incapable of knowing the difference between right and wrong. Whatever she gained, it wasn't positive.The big picture of the story defends my position. The entire rest of the Bible is the story of how God helps mankind overcome this problem that originated from the eating of the fruit. Since this entire book is about this problem, it isn't a stretch to try to understand this part of the story looking at it through the basis of the fruit being bad for all of mankind.

[SweetDee 0]

Perhaps but unfortunately, you base it on a lie by saying God offers or gave us freedom of choice.Do it my way is not free will. it is a threat.Free will God style.

If God gave a hoot about the free will that He supposedly gave us, He sure is an Indian giver all over the O T where He tramples all over man’s free will to live as He went about killing us at Sodom and using genocide on us in Noah‘s day. Your God is anhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78H-tRFShiYSung by God's victims. RegardsDL

Honestly, the discussion those other 2 guys are having is way better. Sorry, but anyone who can't see that they have choices every day and no one is making them do anything is just not playing with a full deck.

[Greatest I am 0]

Balloon guy“Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden;”Yet He turn around later and prevents it breaking His word and basically saying you may not.Is breaking your word making the initial statement a lie?RegardsDL

[Greatest I am 0]

Honestly, the discussion those other 2 guys are having is way better. Sorry, but anyone who can't see that they have choices every day and no one is making them do anything is just not playing with a full deck.

Choices are there all right but anyone who thinks that do it my way or burn forever is a free choice is not quite thinking.Bleat along.RegardsDL

[SweetDee 0]

Choices are there all right but anyone who thinks that do it my way or burn forever is a free choice is not quite thinking.Bleat along.RegardsDL

You have 2 choices, a piece of Key Lime Pie and a Chunk of raw liver, which do you choose?No matter which, a choice is made. Now, you can say one is better than the other but you have the absolute freedom to choose either or. Even if the pie was wrapped in cotton candy, wishes and cocaine, and the liver was wrapped in human stomach lining and dog shit, you still would have a choice. No one could take that away from you, until it was taken away and you were left with only one option. Which, in that instance you would find people upset because they still wanted to at least make the choice, they want that power. As a matter of fact humans have fought to the death for that very concept. You're all upset because an entity that can make you do whatever he pleases decided that he thought it would be best if you were in the drivers seat for your life? That's a pretty dumb angle to choose against Christianity IMO.

[SweetDee 0]

Balloon guy“Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden;”Yet He turn around later and prevents it breaking His word and basically saying you may not.Is breaking your word making the initial statement a lie?RegardsDL

That's only half the scripture, it's actually only half the sentence. Never mind, I want to publicly apologize to Jeepster, he was right. You are a complete waste of time.

[Balloon guy 158]

Are you trying to imply that liver isn't awesome with onions?Because it is.If done right.and the onions are Vidalia swee....ahhhhhh

[vbnautilus 48]

You have 2 choices, a piece of Key Lime Pie and a Chunk of raw liver, which do you choose?No matter which, a choice is made. Now, you can say one is better than the other but you have the absolute freedom to choose either or. Even if the pie was wrapped in cotton candy, wishes and cocaine, and the liver was wrapped in human stomach lining and dog shit, you still would have a choice. No one could take that away from you, until it was taken away and you were left with only one option. Which, in that instance you would find people upset because they still wanted to at least make the choice, they want that power. As a matter of fact humans have fought to the death for that very concept. You're all upset because an entity that can make you do whatever he pleases decided that he thought it would be best if you were in the drivers seat for your life? That's a pretty dumb angle to choose against Christianity IMO.

Can't say I agree with this. The presence of free will is not binary, there are degrees. If someone puts a gun to your head and says "PICK THE LIVER OR I KILL YOU" do you still have a choice? Sort of... but not really. The liver is pretty much a forced move at that point. There are gray areas in the spectrum of choice including various combinations of coercion, compulsion, obstacle, and awareness of options. DL's point (if he has one) is that freedom of choice in which one alternative guarantees eternal damnation is not really what most people consider freedom. If it is, then women in Saudi Arabia are free to wear short skirts... so long as they don't mind being burned at the stake.

[BaseJester 1]

But the reason the serpent told them what he told them was to get them to disobey God. When he asked Eve what God said, she lied about what He said, saying that not only could they not eat of it, but they couldn't even touch it. The serpent says that's not true, so she eats it, and she begins dying. The only thing God told them was that they would die if they ate it. They did. The serpent said they wouldn't die, but they would become like God. Well he was wrong about the first thing, what does the second thing mean?

If you think "knowledge of good and evil" is ambiguous or impossible, take it up with the author of Genesis. I think it's plain.

Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

Excellent. Yes, this is what God tells Adam. And God doesn't deceive people (*cough* Abraham *cough*), so we know this to be true. That's your position, right?

They were in paradise, everything was perfect, animals lived next to each other without killing each other, no pain, no death no problems. Because they didn't mention parts of it is not conclusive proof that it didn't exist.I already have stated that the only way to infer from the fact that the consequences of disobeying God was dying, this means that they must not have been dying, or they had eternal life.Eve lied to the serpent about what God said by adding that they 'couldn't even touch the tree', so she wasn't incapable of knowing the difference between right and wrong. Whatever she gained, it wasn't positive.

Then wouldn't you expect God to react differently after Adam and Eve ate the fruit? "Oh shit, Adam! Now you're going to die!! Quick, eat from the Tree of Life, so that you will once again be immortal, knowing good & evil, just like before!"

[Greatest I am 0]

You have 2 choices, a piece of Key Lime Pie and a Chunk of raw liver, which do you choose?No matter which, a choice is made. Now, you can say one is better than the other but you have the absolute freedom to choose either or. Even if the pie was wrapped in cotton candy, wishes and cocaine, and the liver was wrapped in human stomach lining and dog shit, you still would have a choice. No one could take that away from you, until it was taken away and you were left with only one option. Which, in that instance you would find people upset because they still wanted to at least make the choice, they want that power. As a matter of fact humans have fought to the death for that very concept. You're all upset because an entity that can make you do whatever he pleases decided that he thought it would be best if you were in the drivers seat for your life? That's a pretty dumb angle to choose against Christianity IMO.

No. A true free choice is neither.RegardsDL

[Greatest I am 0]

Can't say I agree with this. The presence of free will is not binary, there are degrees. If someone puts a gun to your head and says "PICK THE LIVER OR I KILL YOU" do you still have a choice? Sort of... but not really. The liver is pretty much a forced move at that point. There are gray areas in the spectrum of choice including various combinations of coercion, compulsion, obstacle, and awareness of options. DL's point (if he has one) is that freedom of choice in which one alternative guarantees eternal damnation is not really what most people consider freedom. If it is, then women in Saudi Arabia are free to wear short skirts... so long as they don't mind being burned at the stake.

If I have a point?You seem to have found it with ease.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_iSIv26S_oRegardsDL

[Greatest I am 0]

"They were in paradise, everything was perfect, animals lived next to each other without killing each other"Show the verse please.Vegetarian lions and vultures. LOL.RegardsDL

[phlegm 6]

"They were in paradise, everything was perfect, animals lived next to each other without killing each other"Show the verse please.Vegetarian lions and vultures. LOL.RegardsDL

Are you by chance a defrocked priest, or maybe a seminary school flunk out For someone who hates God, you sure have put a lot of effort into learning about him.

[Balloon guy 158]

Are you by chance a defrocked priest, or maybe a seminary school flunk out For someone who hates God, you sure have put a lot of effort into learning about him.

Are you under the impression this guy actually has studied this?He's reading some hack book and thinks he is deep.The fact that he thinks God is limited shows that he has no effort to honest evaluation of the issues

[Balloon guy 158]

If you think "knowledge of good and evil" is ambiguous or impossible, take it up with the author of Genesis. I think it's plain. Excellent. Yes, this is what God tells Adam. And God doesn't deceive people (*cough* Abraham *cough*), so we know this to be true. That's your position, right?Then wouldn't you expect God to react differently after Adam and Eve ate the fruit? "Oh shit, Adam! Now you're going to die!! Quick, eat from the Tree of Life, so that you will once again be immortal, knowing good & evil, just like before!"

I spoke with my pastor today about this and he explained it in a way I failed.You are applying western understanding of the notion of knowledge, like an intellectual pursuit. The eastern meaning is more of an experiential understanding. Which is why when describing sex with your wife, the Bible says you 'know your wife'. Eve received an experiential knowledge of evil, she knew the theory of good and evil because she could think, but until she ate of the fruit, she had never experienced evil, and as such she now was tainted by the sin. It changed her because she wasn't made for this intimate knowledge of sin.He said it better.

[vbnautilus 48]

Are you by chance a defrocked priest, or maybe a seminary school flunk out For someone who hates God, you sure have put a lot of effort into learning about him.

He believes in god. GreatestIAm is not an atheist, he is a former christian who rejected the specifics of the theology.

[WordsOfTheProphet 0]

He believes in god. GreatestIAm is not an atheist, he is a former christian who rejected the specifics of the theology.

If you are a former christian who believes in God, yet tries to make God & the bible look bad in every possible way, what are you then? Sounds like Lucifer fell his ass from heaven into the FCP forum.