by Elsewhere 162 Replies latest jw friends
Supposing you were able to insert a DNA strand that would fix the disease within 1000 generations. Would you stick with the program?
c'mon, man...it was a yes or no question. DNA strand?...if you could fix them, would you? or would you not?
we make this situation so complicated in an effort to justify god's position
Let's see exactly what happened.
Genesis 3, NIV (my comments in red)
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "
This is indeed what God had said in chapter 2, verse 17, although Eve hadn't been created at the time, so she may have only heard this from Adam.
4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
The serpent contradicts God here. He tells Eve she won't die, but will be like God, knowing good and evil.
6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
This seems to be closer to what the serpent told Eve, than what God told Adam
8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, "Where are you?"
As an aside, I find it interesting that they were able to hide from God.
10 He answered, "I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid."
11 And he said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?"
12 The man said, "The woman you put here with me-she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it."
13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?"
The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."
14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this,
"Cursed are you above all the livestock
and all the wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring [1] and hers;
he will crush [2] your head,
and you will strike his heel."
16 To the woman he said,
"I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
with pain you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you."
This was never part of the deal. God had said that eating from the tree would result in death, but this is something else that he has chosen to do to Eve to punish her. He has decided that he will actively increase the pain she feels when giving birth, as well as condemning her to be dominated by her husband.
17 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,'
"Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat of it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return."
Again, this is a new and deliberate punishment imposed by God, not a "consequence" of eating the fruit.
20 Adam [3] named his wife Eve, [4] because she would become the mother of all the living.
21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. God himself here confirms that what happened is exactly as the serpent predicted
He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
God obviously feels threatened by his creations' new status, so he takes action.
23 So the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side [5] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.
God deliberately removes Adam and Eve from access to the tree of life. Not an inevitable consequence of their actions but an active and deliberate punishment by God.
---
A straightforward reading of the text clearly shows that it was God who lied, not the serpent and that he punished Adam and Eve. They did not die. They were not poisoned by eating the fruit but rather were punished by God for disobeying him. God apparently became afraid because the man had become like him and banished him from the garden so that he could not live forever. He also cursed Adam and Eve, making their lives miserable and more difficult. None of this was a direct consequence of their actions. It was punishment by an insecure god.
very simply put, if we had the power to cure the stupid rabbits, would we? or would we stand there and watch them suffer? no, no...take away all the "perfect justice" stuff and "Divine Authority under attack" stuff that we project upon god. yes or no, would you fix the rabbits?
That's a good point, too.
some offspring might live to a reasonable age, with no ill effects or deformities.
Relating this back to sinful humans, all are born with sin, all fall short, all die. That means all have ill effects and deformities. That doesn't look too good on the resume of a supposedly perfect god.
A straightforward reading of the text clearly shows that it was God who lied, not the serpent and that he punished Adam and Eve. They did not die. They were not poisoned by eating the fruit but rather were punished by God for disobeying him. God ... banished him from the garden so that he could not live forever. He also cursed Adam and Eve, making their lives miserable and more difficult.
Thank you. When you read the account without any preconceived notions and accept it as it is written, this is the conclusion that you have to come up with. Anything else is a concoction of theory without basis.
LOL - you guys crack me up. I already told you that I think it's a story.
I have no need to justify or defend God, I'm just merrily throwing a few refutations at you in an attempt to let you think.
The alternative is for some to remain believing that the WTS position is fully the biblical one, when it's patently has an abortive theology.
Doogie:
I already said that I view the account as a story of disconnection.
Reconnection was immediately available, too, unless you want to believe WTS theology on the subject.
Derek:
Yeah, I don't know how a baby is supposed to get squeezed through such a small opening without pain, to be honest.
Also, a physically stronger and totally p*ssed off male is probably in a pretty good position to dominate his spouse, especially if there aren't any other humans around (I aint supporting that, incidentally).
I find the "hiding" scene interesting, too.
However the lie wasn't the knowledge bit, but the bit about dying.
According to the story he told a lie, and sweetened it with a truth.
It all sounds pretty elaborate, though, huh?
Yeah, I don't know how a baby is supposed to get squeezed through such a small opening without pain, to be honest.
Poor design on that front too then!
Also, a physically stronger and totally p*ssed off male is probably in a pretty good position to dominate his spouse, especially if there aren't any other humans around (I aint supporting that, incidentally).
In reality, sure. But in the account, God deliberately made things that way to punish Eve.
However the lie wasn't the knowledge bit, but the bit about dying.
According to the story he told a lie, and sweetened it with a truth.
The serpent didn't lie, according to the story. Only God did. The serpent told Eve that she would not die from eating the fruit. She didn't. He told her she would become like God, knowing good and bad. She did. After his lie was discovered, God punished Adam and Eve and conspired to prevent them living forever.
It all sounds pretty elaborate, though, huh?
Elaborate. And unbelievable. And pointless. Cleary it didn't happen in any real sense. As a story, it's been co-opted by Christians, most of whom teach that the serpent is Satan the Devil, although there's nothing in the text to support this. They teach that the serpent lied, although this too is unsupportable from an honest reading of the text. JWs claim the woman stops being Eve and suddenly becomes "Jehovah's invisible organization". In reality, of course, it's a Just So story, invented by a superstitious Bronze Age tribe with limited knowledge of the world around them.
Undercover:
Relating this back to sinful humans, all are born with sin, all fall short, all die. That means all have ill effects and deformities.
That would depend on whether the deformity ws physical or spiritual.
That doesn't look too good on the resume of a supposedly perfect god.
Oh? Has he applied for an opening in another universe?
Further, I ask you as I asked Terry, what definition are you using for the word "perfect".
Derek:
It's more like a "Pandora's box" story, with "God" prewarning of some nasty consequences for opening the box.
In the story the serpent does deceive the woman. You may disagree, but I think I was pretty clear in pointing out which bit was a lie. She ate, she died.
Where did God lie, in the story? He never said anything about them not receiving knowledge from the tree, but rather named the tree accordingly. The only thing that was stated was eat and die. If it was so internally inconsistent, how do you think it managed to last as long as it has? Methinks your bias may be showing
It's more like a "Pandora's box" story, with "God" prewarning of some nasty consequences for opening the box.
Yes, an ancient myth explaining for a primitive audience why the world is the way it is. (Notice how it's always the woman who screws things up )
In the story the serpent does deceive the woman. You may disagree, but I think I was pretty clear in pointing out which bit was a lie. She ate, she died.
No, she ate, she got knowledge. God discovered this, God killed her.
Where did God lie, in the story? He never said anything about them not receiving knowledge from the tree, but rather named the tree accordingly. The only thing that was stated was eat and die.
He said: "In the day you eat from it, you will positively die." This just didn't happen in the story. Adam and Eve only died hundreds of years later, and would not have died at all had God not removed them from the garden.
If it was so internally inconsistent, how do you think it managed to last as long as it has?
It's not internally inconsistent. It's only inconsistent when lined up with the later beliefs and traditions of Judaism and Christianity. The Elohim in the Genesis account are not a loving father-god. They seem to be petty, fallible limited creatures. Adam and Eve stole knowledge from their gods in the same way Prometheus stole fire from his. The gods don't like their tricks being usurped.
Methinks your bias may be showing
Likewise
Oh? Has he applied for an opening in another universe?
He might oughta. He's doing a pretty shitty job at this one.
Further, I ask you as I asked Terry, what definition are you using for the word "perfect".
Incapable of making mistakes. It cannot err. In addition, perfection begets pefection. Therefore any creation from perfection would also have to be perfect. If perfection creates evil or something capable of imperfection, then perfection did not exist. Even with free will, a pefect being would make a pefect choice. It cannot err.
That's why I can't accept the pefect god creating perfect beings who sinned theory. Just my personal thinking.
Undercover,
I view the Bible as mythological, which is a combination of morality stories and
the history of a certain group of peoples, viewed through the somewhat slanted lenses of said peoples.Like all of us human beans, sometimes they are honest, sometimes they are combining fact and fiction, and sometimes they are telling some really vivid tall tales.
We can learn as much or more sometimes about human nature from stories than we can from reality. Sometimes "reality" can be explained better in story form than with dry facts;)
