Vinny, I like how you explaine your belief even do I don't agree but on page 3 of this topic I ask a question and so far nobody has answred yet so if your not to sick of typing or explaining I would like to hear what you have to say on the subject or any body else for that matter. And someting else you said about every thing as a cause does god have a cause? You also said that someting so complexe as a humain body can not sudenly appear and you are right it can not, it took millions of years to form ( arcording to the theory ) and you sould examen for your self the latest theories and discoveries on the matter. I was really suprised because every thing I knew on evolution came from the WTBTS and they are waaaaaaaaay off.
WHO IS THE INJURED PARTY? What is wrong with this doctrine?
by Terry 87 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
proplog2
Vinny:
The reason I gave the "inheritance" illustration is to attack those that say that there is some "legal" problem with the way God handles original sin. Terry, was approaching this subject from the viewpoint of compensation for damages. My point is that this was a simple matter of failure to meet the terms of a contract. God or anyone else can withdraw from a contract if the other party fails to meet the terms.
I have problems with the Genesis account for other reasons. The foremost one is that it is a myth - a story that is accepted by those who have been embedded in the Judeo-Christian culture and accept without evidence that the Bible really is God's word.
Terry is basically attacking a straw-man. He is arguing for a good cause with a very weak and fallacious argument. There is no problem with the legal structure of the account as the story is related. The gift of life was "conditional". The "conditions" were not met. The gift was withdrawn. And as you say, Vinny, it is nice that "G(god)" kept the offer on the table for Adams offspring. But you may as well be talking about Alice and Wonderland.
-
fifi40
Proplog2 - what utter rubbish!!!!
How could man (Adam and Eve) be considered willing participants in a contract that was totally one sided from the start. They did not ask to be created, were given no choice in that or the agreement god put in place once HE HAD CREATED them. A contract is made between to willing sides who are both well informed and experienced before they make their decision to become involved. What would have happened if rather than eating from the tree, they had just simply said we dont accept the terms. There was no place for them to go, it is a matter of do as I say or else, basically. Adam and Eve had no choice really and all the odds were stacked in Gods favour. He holds all the cards. Hardly what you could call a level or fair playing field.
To compare this to a legal argument that God could justiflably opt out of is like saying when you decide to have kids and they dont do as they are told you opt out of caring and looking after their interests. I know people will argue that Adam and Eve were perfect, and our children are not, but they were as God made them. Like children they had no choice in their being bought into this world, and he made them with the ability to sin, to be flawed, in the same way we have children knowing they will not always do as we tell or act in a PERFECT way. God already knew this about Adam and Eve, otherwise it would not have been necessary for him to put this test to them.
The question really is - God created man for his own pleasure, whatever form that pleasure took. Man did not request to be made. After making man, which he designed with the ability to sin, reason for themselves, not behave perfectly, listen to someone wishing to deceive and become convinced, he was dissappointed to find that they acted in a way in which he had created them able to, and for that he exacted his punishment not just on them but on all subsequent offspring. Do you or anyone else believe the punishment fits the crime? That these two humans created by God acted in a way that he had created them able to. That the suffering, hardship and pain endured since then by many millions of humans is right compared to one act of disobedience by the first pair. If he wanted perfect worship he should have created them/us without fault or the ability to fail. If he wanted humans to excercise freedom to worship he should have accepeted that they may choose not to. Why give freedom to choose anyway if you are not willing to accept the decision made by the people choosing. If we acted in a God like way we really would say to our kids "Eat anything you want in the house, but if you eat that one chocolate left in the box you will have to die". Extreme I know but thats about the top and bottom of it.
-
proplog2
fifi:
"Utter Rubbish" isn't that what the lactose intolerant call "MILK"?
Get off the flame express.
First of all we are talking about a "story". We can't say much more than what the story covers. You are entitled to speculate about how much Adam knew or didn't know. Those who believe in God and the Story would speculate that God made a pretty good deal with Adam.
Adam could have told God that he wasn't going to obey him and that he resented having to kiss god's ass in worshipful obedience. But apparently he was on with the deal. We are not talking about Patrick Henry "give me freedom or give me death".
Where did you study contracts? Who was "uninformed" in this situation? It doesn't say Adam ignorantly agreed. And god never said he was going to kill Adam. Therefore you are wrong to speculate that he wasn't informed. And you can't recreate, read a report of the minutes of the meeting, or otherwise capture what wasn't stated. How do you know God didn't have a deep sleep fall over Adam and gave him a vision of the world in 2007 if he ate of the tree? It doesn't say. And since IT doesn't say you are in no position to say IT.
You state that the contract was one sided. Prove that! If everything would have worked out God would have gotten his ass kissed on a regular basis and Adam would live to see another day - to perpetuity or until Adam got tired of it.
"The question really is - God created man for his own pleasure, whatever form that pleasure took."
That is not a question. That is a statement AND let it be noted it is your statement.
What are you talking about - punishment fitting the crime? You again are assuming you know all the facts. How do you know that Adam maybe thought the tree itself was deadly poisonous?
Any discussion of the "story" should be limited to what the story says and the basic premise upon which the story is based.
The story makes fairly good sense if you view God as absolutely just. Then any problems are easily answered by saying that God's ways are higher than mans ways" "all his works are perfect".
Once again the problem is there is no god - so what.
And again calling my posts rubbish as part of your response puts you in my "idiot" bin. Idiots are people I have no interest in talking to.
-
RAF
Among other things did any ever wonder why since they were fertile (adulte since the first day in this account) and perfect and that it was one of their first command (make kids to populate the world) why they didn't have kids before they have sined? ... This story just can't be taken literally.
-
fifi40
Proplog2 please in future refer to me as the 'village idiot', it has so much more of a pleasant ring to it and is in fact more appropriate. I have no problem with you putting me in the said bin as I will be keeping good company, all humans are capable of being idiots at some point during their life and most are at some point. Sticking labels on people, now thats a great sport I am sure we will have a lot of fun doing it. For some it is okay to call someone else's argument weak and fallacious, but when the table is turned and it is our own opinion that is criticised we dont like it.
In calling your response utter rubbish, I explained why I considered it so. To talk about this story in terms of 'contracts' and legal problems is ridiculous. Try suing God - actually there is quite a humourous film with Billy Connolly in about this, The Man who sued God - idiots might like it. Whatever, and I dont presume to know, Adam knew about Gods expectations, instruction or the consequence's he was dealing with someone with infinite wisdom and all knowing. Adam was Gods creation, therefore God knew what to expect from him. In the same way we dont expect our children to behave perfectly at all times because that is not how they are born, yet we still take care of them, guide them and love them, God knew he had created Adam with the ability to sin. If he knew this and knew the impact this would have on Adam and all subsequent offspring then he is not of a loving, fair God. I say again the playing field could never be level.
I never said God said he would kill Adam, but he did say that if they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and bad, in the day you eat from it you will positively die. He had given them life and he was taking it away. If someone serves me with an ultimatum that requires obedience on my part or else I will die (and so will generations of my descendants), I may well obey, but I wont be a willing participant who has agreed to this so called contract. But being an IDIOT I may well disobey anyway!!!!
And so rests my case (not that you will be replying to such drivel anyway)
All the best to you
Fi
-
MsMcDucket
Since you all are making analogies to children, and since RAF has questioned "Why didn't Adam and Eve have children prior to eating from the tree", how old was Adam when he ate from that tree? Was he old enough to have children?
-
Terry
on page 3 of this topic I ask a question and so far nobody has answred yet so if your not to sick of typing or explaining I would like to hear what you have to say on the subject or any body else for that matter. And someting else you said about every thing as a cause does god have a cause?
Humans have a tendency to fill in the blanks in their knowledge. When lacking facts they make guesses. Often they create a Just-So story that attempts to give a back story explanation.
The oral stories of how we got here and why we are going to die included all kinds of fabulous extrapolations. The Genesis account gives us the most familiar ones in our culture.
God came from man's desire to have an outside agency to appeal to when there is no hope. It is a King's X, and Easy button and a magic word all rolled into one.
God is the subconscious desire for a Way Outta Here.
-
proplog2
Terry:
My frustration comes from the fact that probably 90% of the people in the US who use the internet believe that Adam and Eve were real people and everything in the Bible happened exactly the way it says.
Even X-JW's don't really get liberated. Look at the "revered" (a little too much) Ray Franz. Is he a hero? He has written a couple of excellent books showing what is going on inside the "black box" but he can't escape the gravitational pull of the mass of nonsense that condenses into religious systems.
-
RAF
Let's talk about symbolisms (shortly)
If any want to take this account literraly, nothing says how hold Adam and Eve were when they sined and why they didn't have kids before (but realised that if they did - and that's why they didn't of course - God would maybe have two kinds of kids to deal with (sometimes kids can be wiser if they just listening the right bell) on the same earth and it would have been a whole other story, but it just can’t be an other story because of what this story really means.
Anyway in this story they were naïve and they didn't know everything (including the good and the bad - just like babys)
Now why would any (in being them) after they sined, hide their nudity since they were only two of them as a couple?(Do you think that something told them that for instance angels could get horny while they didn't before Adam and Eve sined and that it is not the angels who sined first or it's all about and just satan? Which have an other meaning = influence on the Ego (and only your ego can influence your Ego (but that’s an other topic just very related to this story).
Well to me it's all about symbolisms ...
The reality (to me regarding this symbolic story) is that we've all experienced that at some point (when you are a baby you don't care being nude - but later you know how naughty some people can feel about it and then you hide your body (or you show it LOL).