Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

71 (27.7%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

114 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (23.8%)

Total Members Voted: 251

[origamiscienceguy]

When he was dragged off by guards? Not fighting them was as far as he went.

When he was praying before he was arrested, he said this:
"Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.""

This shows that Jesus is Submitting to the Fathers will, not enslaved by it. He is voluntarily doing this.

[TD1]

Ah. Nice of god to give the same fate to animals, then, who shared no part in Eve's "sin"

Eh. Anger isn't sinful in and of itself. It depends on what you're angry about. Jesus got pretty angry at the merchants and moneychangers in the temple, for example. God has no problem with people being angry about sin, and because sin is disobeying God, God is justified in getting angry at people disobeying him.

Someone call America. Sounds like we have a tyrant 

When he was dragged off by guards? Not fighting them was as far as he went.

When he was praying before he was arrested, he said this:
"Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.""

This shows that Jesus is Submitting to the Fathers will, not enslaved by it. He is voluntarily doing this.

It also shows he didn't want to.

[origamiscienceguy]

When he was dragged off by guards? Not fighting them was as far as he went.

When he was praying before he was arrested, he said this:
"Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.""

This shows that Jesus is Submitting to the Fathers will, not enslaved by it. He is voluntarily doing this.

It also shows he didn't want to.

He wanted to save humanity. But he would have preferred a lot less suffering.

[Rolan7]

... Ehhhhhhh... God's pretty evil, mate. Biblically and via creation. Worlds kind of shitty and in lots of evil ways. Disease (and the really horrid ones, like worms in your veins and eyeballs, or your muscles and skin literally turning to bone, trapping you in a cage of your own tissues), natural disasters, 99.99999999% of the universe being inhospitable to life as we know it (human life especially), the favoritism of a tiny tribe in a backwater region that's only redeeming resource wouldn't be relevant for thousands of years (and even then, Israel doesn't have much oil if any )

He's kind of a wonky dude. If not evil, not exactly "father knows best" good. I'd steer clear if I heard of an actual person with his track-record.

That is all mankind fault. If you want to point fingers, you can blame Eve, but we all have sinned. There was no disease, death, or pain before that.

But we didn't create diseases, or vile parasites, or dangerous weather.  Even if your creation story is correct, God created all of those, and not even in response to Eve's mistake.  None of those are mentioned in Genesis 3.  One could suggest diseases and parasites were introduced along with mortality, but I don't see anything that actually says that.  Creatures were all specifically created earlier, presumably including parasites like tapeworms and nasty insects.  Arguably infective bacteria and fungi as well.

God's curses were:

3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
3:18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

...  Is it just me or did women get the bad end of that deal?  Everything God did to man, IE hunger and mortality, applies to women too (though the language here amusingly doesn't *say* that).  Whereas women also get painful childbirth and are cursed to desire and feel submissive to men.  (Free will is soooo important to God, isn't it...)

I guess it's intentional since she's the one who convinced Adam.  Even though she had no concept of right and wrong, and was convinced lied to by a celestial being, and Adam agreed to do it.

I do love that a strict reading suggests that Adam gets mortality and a malus to farming, while women don't.  I'm imagining Adam going hunting or goofing off while Eve farms, since he's cursed to suck at it (and she's cursed to enjoy serving him).  And then both of them being super surprised when she dies.

Edit: And though I mentioned this last time, it bears repeating:

3:22 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:

God did this to all of us, forever, deliberately.  Punishment is only just when it prevents future crimes by exclusion or rehabilitation, and it's never just to apply it to uninvolved parties like descendants.

[origamiscienceguy]

... Ehhhhhhh... God's pretty evil, mate. Biblically and via creation. Worlds kind of shitty and in lots of evil ways. Disease (and the really horrid ones, like worms in your veins and eyeballs, or your muscles and skin literally turning to bone, trapping you in a cage of your own tissues), natural disasters, 99.99999999% of the universe being inhospitable to life as we know it (human life especially), the favoritism of a tiny tribe in a backwater region that's only redeeming resource wouldn't be relevant for thousands of years (and even then, Israel doesn't have much oil if any )

He's kind of a wonky dude. If not evil, not exactly "father knows best" good. I'd steer clear if I heard of an actual person with his track-record.

That is all mankind fault. If you want to point fingers, you can blame Eve, but we all have sinned. There was no disease, death, or pain before that.

But we didn't create diseases, or vile parasites, or dangerous weather.  Even if your creation story is correct, God created all of those, and not even in response to Eve's mistake.  None of those are mentioned in Genesis 3.  One could suggest diseases and parasites were introduced along with mortality, but I don't see anything that actually says that.  Creatures were all specifically created earlier, presumably including parasites like tapeworms and nasty insects.  Arguably infective bacteria and fungi as well.

God's curses were:

3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
3:18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

...  Is it just me or did women get the bad end of that deal?  Everything God did to man, IE hunger and mortality, applies to women too (though the language here amusingly doesn't *say* that).  Whereas women also get painful childbirth and are cursed to desire and feel submissive to men.  (Free will is soooo important to God, isn't it...)

I guess it's intentional since she's the one who convinced Adam.  Even though she had no concept of right and wrong, and was convinced lied to by a celestial being, and Adam agreed to do it.

I do love that a strict reading suggests that Adam gets mortality and a malus to farming, while women don't.  I'm imagining Adam going hunting or goofing off while Eve farms, since he's cursed to suck at it (and she's cursed to enjoy serving him).  And then both of them being super surprised when she dies.

In the garden, everything ate plants. It would make sense that microbes were herbivores as well. (or they photosynthesized)
There is a debate about what "submit" means in this context. I like to think that it is willingly respect their authority. For example, Men lead the dances. Also, Adam and Eve populated the entire earth in a few generations. I think it goes without being said that Eve was not busy farming most of the time, (not that that's relevant)

[Rolan7]

thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee

Seems pretty straightforward, though I certainly don't know Hebrew...

My point stands, though.  Even if everything was vegetarian before, which seems to be the implication of 1:30:

1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

I don't see anything saying that it's humanity's fault that animals started eating each other.  I don't see where that change occurred at all, honestly.  Just that in the next chapter, Abel has a flock of animals and starts butchering them.  (Side note, it's interesting how Cain the less-favored was a plant-farmer.  God really loves blood sacrifices).

Adam and Eve didn't have any magic power or reason to modify the diet of all Earth's creatures.  Even if it was a consequence of them eating the fruit, which I don't see explained anywhere, they certainly had no idea.

[origamiscienceguy]

thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee

Seems pretty straightforward, though I certainly don't know Hebrew...

My point stands, though.  Even if everything was vegetarian before, which seems to be the implication of 1:30:

1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

I don't see anything saying that it's humanity's fault that animals started eating each other.  I don't see where that change occurred at all, honestly.  Just that in the next chapter, Abel has a flock of animals and starts butchering them.  (Side note, it's interesting how Cain the less-favored was a plant-farmer.  God really loves blood sacrifices).

Adam and Eve didn't have any magic power or reason to modify the diet of all Earth's creatures.  Even if it was a consequence of them eating the fruit, which I don't see explained anywhere, they certainly had no idea.

God preferred Abel because he gave the best of what he had. Cain most likely just threw any old plant on.
The Bible doesn't say when animals started eating each other, but I like to think (my opinion) it happened after the flood because those animals got along, and there are no records of people dying from disease in that time.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[origamiscienceguy]

Did tapeworms and viruses chill in jars on the Ark while they waited for predatory and parasitic behavior to become fashionable?

Or just anywhere. If they still photosynthesized, I see no reason why they would need to be anywhere special.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[origamiscienceguy]

How did viruses photosynthesize when they're literally smaller than the cell structures used for photosynthesis?

Viruses aren't considered living.

You shouldn't take what I'm saying as fact, I'm just throwing out possibilities.

[Rolan7]

God preferred Abel because he gave the best of what he had. Cain most likely just threw any old plant on.
The Bible doesn't say when animals started eating each other, but I like to think (my opinion) it happened after the flood because those animals got along, and there are no records of people dying from disease in that time.

4:2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
4:3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.
4:4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
4:5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

I suppose this is straying off topic, but I read this as emphasizing the value of meat vs plants for sacrifice.  It doesn't say Cain was at all lazy, or kept the best vegetables for himself.  The rest of the Bible does make it clear that God needs animal sacrifice, too.  Though maybe he formed that preference based on this event.

That's an interesting idea that the creatures were vegetarian on the ark...  It does seem to fit the information we're given, though seems odd that the change didn't merit mention.  Does that mean you accept that we aren't responsible for disease, though?  Assuming you included the bacteria and parasites in that theory, disease only started after the great flood, a long time after Adam & Eve's mistake.

You shouldn't take what I'm saying as fact, I'm just throwing out possibilities.

Understood!  Try not to feel pressured, I really appreciate you talking to us about your beliefs and theories.  I love looking up Bible verses...  It seems like every time I do, I understand the stories a bit better.  They are fascinating from a mythological perspective.  And I like coming up with in-universe theories too.

[origamiscienceguy]

The Bible emphasizes that Abel did the best he could, while it didn't say the same for cain.

"And Abel also brought an offering--fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering."

[Frumple]

How did viruses photosynthesize when they're literally smaller than the cell structures used for photosynthesis?

The wizard did it, poh. When you're dealing with young-earth creationism and flood geology, that's literally the entire answer. God did it, real geology can get buggered, etc., etc.

Incidentally, the earliest indications of disease I'm finding mention of was lesions characteristic of TB found on human bones a good 500k years old. Trachoma a "mere" 10k or so. Leprosy's been traced back literally millions of years. Seems to be a nice host of things like that -- disease is way older than judaism, nevermind christianity itself. Completely incompatible with the sub-10k year old world folks, though.

[Arcvasti]

Honestly, a fair bit of the first part of Genesis reads like parables to me. When the alleged events directly contradict evidence[EG: Adam and Eve somehow peopling the entire world from a miniature gene pool], there are two main explanations: 1: The account is factually inaccurate or 2: A wizard God did it. It would make a fair amount of sense for large sections of Genesis to be allegory which convey important religious points while not being literal accounts. This style is used elsewhere in the Bible, for example, in Job. While a man named Job probably did not go through those exact things, his story is used to prove/illustrate/whatever a philosophical point.

FAKEDIT: Oh dear many ninjas. What do you call a group of ninjas even? Is there a specific term?