Print

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

[PTTG??]

So there are a number of people who take the Bible literally.

I'm not going to say weather that's a good or bad idea- at least not anywhere these people could find out- but there's something that's been bothering me:

Genisis, in particular the whole "Tree of Knowledge" bit.

First of all, God doesn't want anything to bother the tree, right? He doesn't want any animals to eat of the tree and get free will, so he... just tells them not to eat from it?

Then, he just walks (floats or whatever) away, without so much as leaving a reminder note.
Now remember, nobody has free will here, as that sort of came from the 'tree' event, so it can't be a test or anything.

Here God is either incredibly gullible or just devious, because anyone who's dealt with humans before will know that telling them not to do something and leaving is the most effective way of getting them to do it. we'll get back to this.

Now, Satan shows up. God can make the heavens and earth, knows and sees all, ect., ect., but he can't hire a bouncer? I mean, god, by definition, knows that Satan is there, tempting people to eat apples that He doesn't want eaten, but God doesn't do anything about it.

So, god shows up AFTER the fact, all angry. He ignores the fact that without free will, there was no way that Adam and Eve could have known not to listen to Satan. He kicks mankind out of the garden, and curses Adam and Eve and all of their descendants, for the rest of time to be Damned over this apple problem. It takes him thousands of years to get around to un-damning everybody and that's a whole thing with Romans and nailing people to trees that I won't get into.

So perhaps this was all a big trick by God to give people moral fiber and backbone by kicking them out of the garden. But He's God, so why sneak around or trick people like a certain scaly guy? He could just throw them out and be done with it.

Also, let's not forget that god just spent last week creating a universe. If he's at it, why make a tree he doesn't want anyone to have? If he must make the tree, why not put it on a mountain or on the opposite side of the globe?

Even if god truly didn't know Satan was there, didn't expect Humans to eat of the tree, put yourself in His sandles; Say you have, oh, some paint and a child. You warn the child not to mess with the paint, and walk away. While you're gone, the neighborhood bully walks up and dares the child to take the paint. Surprise, surprise, the kid reaches up... and spills paint all over themselves!

Now, if you're like God, you kick the kid out of your house and wait 4000 years before sending your other kid to go clean up.

But if you are as benevolent and caring as god supposedly is, maybe you might clean the kid up and forgive them. Or maybe keep the paint locked up. Or maybe keep an eye on them when they play near the paint.

Perhaps the response to this conundrum is "God moves in mysterious ways" but frankly, that doesn't cut it. Anyone who wants a complete fossil record (i.e., every single living thing in an entire family) to "prove" evolution must hold their beliefs to the same standard of proof.

If you can't make sense of God's actions, then maybe, somewhere in the dozens of translations, somebody made a mistake. Wouldn't that be terrible if, say, someone made a mistake in one of the other parts, say those parts about Gomorrah or that say that women are "chattle" or that sons of what's-his-name (the dark-skinned ones) are morally worse than whites?

[Jude]

Perhaps the response to this conundrum is "God moves in mysterious ways" but frankly, that doesn't cut it.

It's the only workable answer there is...and it's feasible because there's no reason to suppose a universal intelligence would work in the same ways, or in ways that make sense to, our limited, evolved, purpose-specific human intelligence that developed on this planet.

Hope that satisfies you.

[Aqizzar]

Wow, sounds exactly like me when I used to hang out on a religious forum.  I'm glad to see I'm not the only person who had gigantic problems with the Garden of Eden story.

So God is all-knowing, all-seeing, and all-powerful.  He makes Man, makes a fruit that will give Man the power to doubt, and tells him to never ever eat the fruit, then nothing.  Either God is short-sighted in a way completely outside of human perspective, or he set up his own creation to an impossible standard. 

An entire eternity of Judgment and suffering is the result.  In the Old Testament, there's a story of a man who tried to conduct a census of all the kingdoms in Israel.  God decreed that no one shall number the Chosen People, so he sent a plague to kill 70000 people, so the census would be wrong.

I have my own answer for this.  I like how you mention the way God is expected to be benevolent and loving.  I don't subscribe to this, and for most of human history no one else did.  The idea that God loves everyone and allowed to exist for some bizare purpose of testing our faith in him a relatively modern invention, mostly from just the Protestant reformation.  The question "why do bad things happen to good people" didn't bother ancient people.  And Christianity and Islam are the only religions that really have any problem reconciling that.

Why?  Because virtually all ancient religions, including Christianity until just a couple centuries ago had a good all purpose answer - God is an asshole.  Why is there evil in the world?  Because God wanted there to be evil.  Why aren't all our prayers answered?  Because God doesn't love us.  Believing that God and the universe are inherently cruel solves pretty much everything.

Some people ask me why I refuse to believe in God (invariably the modern Christian interpretation of God).  Because if you take all the strife of the world, all the stories of mind-blowing atrocity in the Bible, and all the powers of omniscience and omnipotence attributed to God, and then try to reconcile that against the idea that God is all-loving, the only logical answer is that it's all wrong.  That God, if extant, is an asshole is the only rational explanation.  I hope for all our sakes' that the God presented in modern Judeo-Christian philosophy doesn't exist, because the idea of an all-powerful schizophrenic jackass terrifies me.

[woose1]

Yes... well... god does seem to be a little pissed at humanity for no good reason during the old testament.... and well....

After the new testament, he kind of cooled down. Maybe it was 'having a son' thing or maybe he just matured. 

This will be the end of my prescence here in this religious thread.

[JoshuaFH]

Man, I remember back in High school, early in the morning, a woman from a local church would come and hang out in a classroom, and give bakery fresh donuts to everyone. Then she talked about the Bible, and the lesson's it taught and whatnot.

I remember the donuts way more than her teachings, but then again, I could say that about my whole 4 years at high school.

[Servant Corps]

Genisis, in particular the whole "Tree of Knowledge" bit.

First of all, God doesn't want anything to bother the tree, right? He doesn't want any animals to eat of the tree and get free will, so he... just tells them not to eat from it?

Then, he just walks (floats or whatever) away, without so much as leaving a reminder note.
Now remember, nobody has free will here, as that sort of came from the 'tree' event, so it can't be a test or anything.

Here God is either incredibly gullible or just devious, because anyone who's dealt with humans before will know that telling them not to do something and leaving is the most effective way of getting them to do it. we'll get back to this.

Now, Satan shows up. God can make the heavens and earth, knows and sees all, ect., ect., but he can't hire a bouncer? I mean, god, by definition, knows that Satan is there, tempting people to eat apples that He doesn't want eaten, but God doesn't do anything about it.

IWM will likely post a rebuttal, but I think I would post for him.

I believe the apple that you mention had no 'special' property. It had nothing. It is nothing. It is just that, an apple. It's not from the Tree of Knowledge. It's just that. An apple. In fact, I would even hestiate to call it an apple...from the telling of the story, I remember that it's just a "fruit".

God said "Don't eat this apple", to test mankind, to see if it can follow simple instructions. It's not special, it's not important. It's an apple. Do whatever you want, just agree not to eat this apple.

And yet Adam decided to eat the apple anyway. Satan told Adam to eat the Apple, but it was Adam that choosen to believe him. It was a test, and Adam failed.

God intended Man to leave Eden to live on Earth anyway. And when Adam asked for forgiveness for eating the apple, God granted it to him, so there's no concept of original sin either.

[Idiom]

Darby O'Gill just popped into my head. Or at least I believe that was the name of it. Leprechaun offers a man eternal happiness, and he refuses.

Why Evil?

Why not eternal happiness? Because happiness can't exist without sadness. There is no such thing as good or benevolent without bad or evil. I've heard this so many times before, I'm surprised no-one else here has mentioned it but reality as it exists is based on duality and contrast. Elementary philosophy.

God is an asshole.

Remember in the Bible when it says "Man created in God's image"? Most people interpret that as man with some essence of God, but sometimes I think the opposite makes more sense.

The idea of an all-powerful schizophrenic jackass terrifies me.

It's kind of funny. While you refuse to believe in a God because of this, a number of people find this as motivation to do the opposite. You think he doesn't deserve your respect, so you don't give it. Problem is with that in my opinion, if you try that kind of thing in real life, it always ends with someone kicking down your front door.

It's not from the Tree of Knowledge.

So what was "The Knowledge"? That we can refuse him?

[Servant Corps]

So what was "The Knowledge"? That we can refuse him?

Let me be more blatant. There is no such thing as the Tree of Knowledge. I have never heard of this tree ever existing in my religious schools. I suppose the Tree is only something in Christanity though.

EDIT: Oh. Whoops. Thought you were talking to me.

[Aqizzar]

Why Evil?

Why not eternal happiness? Because happiness can't exist without sadness. There is no such thing as good or benevolent without bad or evil. I've heard this so many times before, I'm surprised no-one else here has mentioned it but reality as it exists is based on duality and contrast. Elementary philosophy.

Elementary is exactly the word.  There's plenty of ways to interpret reality, and something being without needed anything to compare it to is just as valid.  That we say "there can be no good without evil" is just a simple of reconciling that the universe has bad things in it with the assumption that bad things are bad.

The idea of an all-powerful schizophrenic jackass terrifies me.

It's kind of funny. While you refuse to believe in a God because of this, a number of people find this as motivation to do the opposite. You think he doesn't deserve your respect, so you don't give it. Problem is with that in my opinion, if you try that kind of thing in real life, it always ends with someone kicking down your front door.

So what then?  I'm supposed to give a God I don't believe exists my unconditional worship so I don't get smote?  I'd hardly be the first Atheist to live a long and happy life.  And even if I was struck by lightning tomorrow for calling God a jerk, that's much of an argument for calling him benevolent is it?

It's not from the Tree of Knowledge.

So what was "The Knowledge"? That we can refuse him?

That's right.  God forbid man from questioning him.  Then man did, and He got pissed about it.  It's a rehash of the Prometheus and Pandora's Box story.

[Jude]

Wow, sounds exactly like me when I used to hang out on a religious forum.  I'm glad to see I'm not the only person who had gigantic problems with the Garden of Eden story.

So God is all-knowing, all-seeing, and all-powerful.  He makes Man, makes a fruit that will give Man the power to doubt, and tells him to never ever eat the fruit, then nothing.  Either God is short-sighted in a way completely outside of human perspective, or he set up his own creation to an impossible standard. 

An entire eternity of Judgment and suffering is the result.  In the Old Testament, there's a story of a man who tried to conduct a census of all the kingdoms in Israel.  God decreed that no one shall number the Chosen People, so he sent a plague to kill 70000 people, so the census would be wrong.

I have my own answer for this.  I like how you mention the way God is expected to be benevolent and loving.  I don't subscribe to this, and for most of human history no one else did.  The idea that God loves everyone and allowed to exist for some bizare purpose of testing our faith in him a relatively modern invention, mostly from just the Protestant reformation.  The question "why do bad things happen to good people" didn't bother ancient people.  And Christianity and Islam are the only religions that really have any problem reconciling that.

Why?  Because virtually all ancient religions, including Christianity until just a couple centuries ago had a good all purpose answer - God is an asshole.  Why is there evil in the world?  Because God wanted there to be evil.  Why aren't all our prayers answered?  Because God doesn't love us.  Believing that God and the universe are inherently cruel solves pretty much everything.

Some people ask me why I refuse to believe in God (invariably the modern Christian interpretation of God).  Because if you take all the strife of the world, all the stories of mind-blowing atrocity in the Bible, and all the powers of omniscience and omnipotence attributed to God, and then try to reconcile that against the idea that God is all-loving, the only logical answer is that it's all wrong.  That God, if extant, is an asshole is the only rational explanation.  I hope for all our sakes' that the God presented in modern Judeo-Christian philosophy doesn't exist, because the idea of an all-powerful schizophrenic jackass terrifies me.

All this only makes sense if you assume that the mind of God works in human terms, though. Philosophically you can make the argument that as humans are (in the grand scheme of things) completely small and insignificant, not to mention incapable of understanding any but the most immediate and local aspects of the universe, it's absurd to suppose that the being which created/runs the universe would behave in ways that make sense to us.

[RAM]

If you already possess absolute knowledge, you do not need tests.
If you possess an absolute power of creation, you do not need trials.

Either god's abilities in these respects are limited.
A large portion of the justifications for god's actions are false.
God is not god.

At the moment I am leaning towards god does not exist, or at least if there are any god type beings that humanity is basically ignorant of them. But that if god does exist that the world is to god much like imagination is to humans, and that an all powerful being is likely to be curious about limitations, so we struggle because god doesn't. Not that it's god's fault, I mean, who in their right mind could consider that their creation could ever have any independent significance...

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

Or this is all just a big, long-lived, Xanatos Gambit.

Or that God has already planned to do so from the beginning.

Not that it's god's fault, I mean, who in their right mind could consider that their creation could ever have any independent significance...

Me.

[Servant Corps]

If you already possess absolute knowledge, you do not need tests.

IWM isn't...defending very well. So, I'm stepping in.

Yes you do need to test. Otherwise, it's not fair.

You would be asking God to start assigning grades, punishing and rewarding people, without showing any sort of proof to the good or bad people. The bad people are going to call God out on it if there was no test, claiming that if God did test them, they might pass.

So, God gives humans tests. He knows if the Humans pass the tests or not. But he still give the humans tests anyway, because if he does not, it would not be fair for the human beings.

To use a human analogy, what would happen if you walk into a classroom, the teacher looks at you, gives you an F, and dismisses you? You might want to at least prove to the teacher that you might be able to pass the class. Alternatively, if the teacher gives you an A and tell you to leave class, you will likely feel cheated, as you didn't really learn anything.

[PTTG??]

All this only makes sense if you assume that the mind of God works in human terms ... humans are ... incapable of understanding any but the most immediate and local aspects of the universe, it's absurd to suppose that the being which created/runs the universe would behave in ways that make sense to us.

Why? If god's actions are perfectly rational, they would be self-evidently rational; in the same way that the most perfect machine will be so clearly labeled and mechanically elegant that anyone could understand it, the perfect thought process would be clearly understandable to anyone.

And isn't it the whole purpose of religion to explain the actions of god(s)? What kind of explanation is "Well, we can't know"?

Perhaps I'm making an assumption about perfection here; but even if god where to take perfect action that we could not understand, the least he could have done is try to do it nicely. It's not like He has limited resources, can't spare the time or whatever.

But why does no one mind that god was so upset about something that the Humans weren't even responsible for? Before having eaten from the tree, they didn't have free will; without free will and the sense of right and wrong, they can't be blamed for falling for the Snake's tricks. By the time the test would have been relevant, they can't effect it's outcome, since they kind of already ate the fruit.

@Servant Corps: But God already knows the results of the tests, so he never needs to run them in the first place. Yes, perhaps these "tests" are learning experiences, but in this particular case, what did Adam and Eve learn, considering that before eating of the tree, they would be unable to learn at all, or even make the choices that god would be testing?

To all: I want to make it clear that I don't want to convince anybody of my perspective, I just want to make mine clear so as to help others explain theirs better.

EDIT:

...But that if god does exist that the world is to god much like imagination is to humans, and that an all powerful being is likely to be curious about limitations, so we struggle because god doesn't...

Interesting... If I understand you correctly, then "God" in one form or annother, is a singular, unlimited, and immaterial entity. This entity, bored, is imagining what it would be like to be a multiple, limited, material entity- i.e., mankind. So we are really all part of the thought processes- if we can call it that- of God, and God's mind is the universe.

Woah, trippy, man.

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

That... is one of the possible outcome I thought...
But that was like... 4 years ago. I have become weak over the course of these years...

Sorry, Servant Corps, but I am under stress, and can't make good arguments...