The Judeo-Christian Moral Standard

[CXXV]

Ooooo...I love this.

For the life of me I will never understand how people can believe in something for which there is zero proof.

Sure Jesus lived. But he was an evangelist just like all those idiots on TV. Perhaps he was the first one and therefore had more influence on people, and some how some way his mumbo jumbo spread and took hold.

Why is that Christians believe that there is only one religion when we know for a fact that there were others long before that. BTW...I think all of those are silly to.

Bottom line is that man created this whole concept of religion for two reasons: POWER and FEAR.

What a great way to intimidate all the uneducated masses than to make them believe that if they don't do as the "good book" says you are going to hell.

 

[WAdude]

Interesting how you are so eager to insult and put down others, yet when presented with factual information correcting your own "SHITDAMNASSFUK", you conveniently ignore it.

Try learning a little humility.

BTW, if you are arguing for the bible, then remember that in eating from the tree, man gained the capacity for knowledge. God kicked adam and eve out lest they eat from the tree of life, become immortal and ultimately become like god. That, at least to me, implies that humans have the capacity to learn a great deal, perhaps even as much as god some day. at least god seemed to be concerned by the possibility or at least the potential of what man could or would do with such knowledge coupled with an eternity of life. Knowing what we tend to do with the little knowledge we have and our short time spans, I have to agree that kicking us out was probably a good idea.

there were still no friendly lions or dinosaurs in the garden. that's just silly.

Actually, God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden to give Adam and Eve a choice to obey Him or disobey Him. Adam and Eve were free to do anything they wanted, except eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Genesis 2:16-17 “And the LORD God commanded the man, ‘You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 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.’” If God had not given Adam and Eve the choice, they would have essentially been robots, simply doing what they were programmed to do. God created Adam and Eve to be “free” beings, able to make decisions, able to choose between good and evil. In order for Adam and Eve to truly be free, they had to have a choice.

There was nothing essentially evil about the tree or the fruit of the tree. It is unlikely that eating the fruit truly gave Adam and Eve any further knowledge. It was the act of disobedience that opened Adam and Eve’s eyes to evil. Their sin of disobeying God brought sin and evil into the world and into their lives. Eating the fruit, as an act of disobedience against God, was what gave Adam and Eve knowledge of evil Genesis 3:6-7.

Yes I know I fuked up on the whole Paul thing. So I am a fuking douchephag for being ignorant, for that little amount of post though.

This is a little off topic, but to the believers, is the earth billions of years old, or thousands of years old?

I believe it is a couple of billion of years old. Most belivers think its a couple of thousand, some dont. Thats their choice.

 

[WAdude]

Ooooo...I love this.

For the life of me I will never understand how people can believe in something for which there is zero proof.

Sure Jesus lived. But he was an evangelist just like all those idiots on TV. Perhaps he was the first one and therefore had more influence on people, and some how some way his mumbo jumbo spread and took hold.

Why is that Christians believe that there is only one religion when we know for a fact that there were others long before that. BTW...I think all of those are silly to.

Bottom line is that man created this whole concept of religion for two reasons: POWER and FEAR.

What a great way to intimidate all the uneducated masses than to make them believe that if they don't do as the "good book" says you are going to hell.

I will never understand why atheists still argue the existence of a god....that good book did influence the way you live you know. Laws, the way people around you act (if they are belivers), political stuff (prolife, prochoice, one argues about killing, the other about free will, and choice), etc.

 

[Isthmus]

Actually, God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden to give Adam and Eve a choice to obey Him or disobey Him. Adam and Eve were free to do anything they wanted, except eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Genesis 2:16-17

 

[Isthmus]

I will never understand why atheists still argue the existence of a god....that good book did influence the way you live you know. Laws, the way people around you act (if they are belivers), political stuff (prolife, prochoice, one argues about killing, the other about free will, and choice), etc.

You are right up to a point. technically it wasn't the book that influenced western culture, as much as it was Roman societal and religious structure that did. It is rome that created christianity as the religion we recognize today, and it is rome that incorporated it and promoted it within it's social and political structure. They were so effective at it, that even after rome ceased to exist as a political unit it's religious arm did not, and it continued to affect western governments (and in many ways uphold roman political, social and military traditions) for centuries to come. The bible, as defined and interpreted by the catholic church (and later other christian sects), was, as you say, an influence, a tool and perhaps even a source of inspiration (at least to some) in the development of western civilizations, but not the necessarily core of that. The church (the organization and to a lesser degree its teachings), on the other hand was a major influence in the development of modern western societies.

 

[Isthmus]

BTW, the attachment below (something I found online) sums up the both sides of the argument pretty well. My apologies in advance to anyone offended.

 

[WAdude]

Actually if you look into translations of the bible you will see that the tree is not the tree of good and evil, but rather the tree of knowledge. the good and evil part is more of a side concept (all that can be good and all that can be evil). nowhere in scripture does it say the reason or the purpose for putting the trees in the garden. You are inferring that on your own. Whether the trees where placed there as a test or a lesson is not something you can know or infer from what is written in scripture. All that we know if that they were placed there. We do know that prior to this incident Adam and eve both had free will (so no chance of robotic behavior like you are claiming). What the fruit of the tree did was impart in them the capacity for knowledge. I suppose we can argue whether that ability came from eating the fruit or from being punished by god, but the bible is pretty specific in the point that it was from eating the fruit (the lesson came later).

As for their disobeying god bringing sin and evil into the world, I ask you this, what about the snake's actions?

The snake was cursed by God.

No, you're being a douchebag for being so proud and for attacking others rather than trying to take the time to learn.

Thanks

 

[Isthmus]

The snake was cursed by God.

I know that, but you still missed the question.

In your original post you stated the following (notice the underlined section):

There was nothing essentially evil about the tree or the fruit of the tree. It is unlikely that eating the fruit truly gave Adam and Eve any further knowledge. It was the act of disobedience that opened Adam and Eve

 

[WAdude]

I know that, but you still missed the question.

In your original post you stated the following (notice the underlined section):


What I'm asking is that if that were so, then what role did the snake's actions play?

Uhhhh, if I am understanding you clearly, its role is to temptate Adam and Eve .

 

[ZDroid1]

Is it just me or is it completely insane that in the year 2010 we're debating the story of a god who forbids the eating of a fruit then a TALKING SNAKE convinces an unbelievably naive women to eat it anyway, and then this god, having just finished building a breathtakingly huge cosmos, apparently has the time to come down to earth for a "cool breeze" (actual quote, see Genesis), and be upset about it?

In a more reasonable age, even a give year old suspects this isn't real. But in a world of brain washed people, it's actually debatable.

 

[Isthmus]

Uhhhh, if I am understanding you clearly, its role is to temptate Adam and Eve .

the word is tempt, and no that was not the point. the point is that you said that Adam and eve released evil into the world by disobeying their god, but technically the snake was already engaged in fairly dubious behavior to begin with, so I'm guessing that it (and god since he obviously knew what it was), must have been well aware of what sin and evil were prior to adam and even getting duped. The implication being that if god and the snake already knew, then adam and eve didn't really release or create anything that didn't already exist. They got the blame for something they didn't technically create, and many a church has been been giving parishioners a guilt trip about this "original sin", since then.

 

[hakr100]

Is it just me or is it completely insane that in the year 2010 we're debating the story of a god who forbids the eating of a fruit then a TALKING SNAKE convinces an unbelievably naive women to eat it anyway, and then this god, having just finished building a breathtakingly huge cosmos, apparently has the time to come down to earth for a "cool breeze" (actual quote, see Genesis), and be upset about it?

In a more reasonable age, even a give year old suspects this isn't real. But in a world of brain washed people, it's actually debatable.

Amen, brother. Religious belief is...a crock. There's just no other way to describe it. It's total, unadulterated bullship.

 

[WAdude]

Is it just me or is it completely insane that in the year 2010 we're debating the story of a god who forbids the eating of a fruit then a TALKING SNAKE convinces an unbelievably naive women to eat it anyway, and then this god, having just finished building a breathtakingly huge cosmos, apparently has the time to come down to earth for a "cool breeze" (actual quote, see Genesis), and be upset about it?

In a more reasonable age, even a give year old suspects this isn't real. But in a world of brain washed people, it's actually debatable.

WTF?! Didnt you start this BS topic, I mean seriously, the first post on here has your name on it, unless ofcourse, your one of those people who have split personalities, Zdroid1-"Im ****ing stupid", Zdroid1-"Your ****ing stupid".

 

[WAdude]

the word is tempt, and no that was not the point. the point is that you said that Adam and eve released evil into the world by disobeying their god, but technically the snake was already engaged in fairly dubious behavior to begin with, so I'm guessing that it (and god since he obviously knew what it was), must have been well aware of what sin and evil were prior to adam and even getting duped. The implication being that if god and the snake already knew, then adam and eve didn't really release or create anything that didn't already exist. They got the blame for something they didn't technically create, and many a church has been been giving parishioners a guilt trip about this "original sin", since then.

They saw sin, realesed, as in spread the sins they saw to their children.

 

[WAdude]

Amen, brother. Religious belief is...a crock. There's just no other way to describe it. It's total, unadulterated bullship.

Religiois belief is believing there is something greater than yourself. The same way you believe that there is no god because your logic has gone into a mode of hiding behind a wall of scientifical evidence and data.

 

[Isthmus]

They saw sin, realesed, as in spread the sins they saw to their children.

Now you're making stuff up. No where in the story does it say this or allude to such being the case. Once again you are drawing conclusions that have no connection to the available information.

 

[Isthmus]

Religiois belief is believing there is something greater than yourself. The same way you believe that there is no god because your logic has gone into a mode of hiding behind a wall of scientifical evidence and data.

You say that as if science was a bad thing. By your own argument, could it not also be argued that science is greater than any one person, or that the universe is more weird and wonderful than we can imagine all on its own, without having to invent fancyful tales to explain it?

 

[gvillager]

WTF?! Didnt you start this BS topic, I mean seriously, the first post on here has your name on it, unless ofcourse, your one of those people who have split personalities, Zdroid1-"Im ****ing stupid", Zdroid1-"Your ****ing stupid".

OK. WOW, what you have just said is the most fuking stupid shit on earth. Do you know what, SHITDAMNASSFUK, means? I dont either, but your stupidity has just tempted me into saying that, cause SHITDAMNASSFUK, you make no sense. So you are saying that if God came to you you would totally think you are right, and he is wrong, AND, the words "remote theoretical possibility" would go through your mind.

Didnt I say that maybe there is a greater reason for him to ask you this? Like, are you just such a little rebel that if god told you to do something you would not do it, because you think your evolved and developed mind is greater than an infinite and all knowing one. Seriously, Im not saying or trying to imply my religion into what you believe, but uhhh.....youve left me with the words What, the, and fuk in my head.

Go tell that to the millions of Christians out there, theyd probably kick your ass. How are you so sure Christianity is a "disease"? The fact that you cant accept the reality that there are things that are far more greater than your petty life is your own disease. We at no point said, "We are all filthy rags deserving eternal suffering". That said, your point is worthless, you cannot win an argument with an omniscient being, you are saying it is immoral and wrong to kill your son if a god told you to, like WTF, even when a greater being shows himself to you, you would not be obedient of him, instead argue with him that it is immoral to kill your son. Really FUKING POINTLESS, its an all mighty being telling you to do something, you DO it no questions asked, especially if he showed proof of himself to you and says he will back you up. You might as well put a gun to your head and say, "fuk me in the ass". There is no reason as to why argue with a greater being, GREATER BEING. Get it, GREATER. Like really, its pointless.

This is really unchristian like behavior coming from someone who claims to be a Christian.

 

[WAdude]

Now you're making stuff up. No where in the story does it say this or allude to such being the case. Once again you are drawing conclusions that have no connection to the available information.

Didnt you ask for an explanantion, there is your answer. Why do you say it is made up?

 

[WAdude]

This is really unchristian like behavior coming from someone who claims to be a Christian.

Im sorry. Nobodies perfect, what, do you expect me to be the nicest and most joyful person on earth?

 

[hakr100]

Religiois belief is believing there is something greater than yourself. The same way you believe that there is no god because your logic has gone into a mode of hiding behind a wall of scientifical evidence and data.

I don't have the sort of ego problems that lead me to believe that I am "greater" than anyone or anything else. I don't view the universe that way.

And that "wall of scientifical evidence" is something in which I believe.

 

[gvillager]

Im sorry. Nobodies perfect, what, do you expect me to be the nicest and most joyful person on earth?

No, but as a Christian you should hold yourself to a higher standard. Just because people don't agree with you (respectfully or not) it doesn't mean you need to be disrespectful in return.

If I was visiting a church and observed the behavior displayed by you in this thread, I'd leave and never return.

 

[ZDroid1]

Religiois belief is believing there is something greater than yourself..

I love that. Believing in something greater than yourself is an excuse to believe in talking snakes and magic wands.

 

[WAdude]

I love that. Believing in something greater than yourself is an excuse to believe in talking snakes and magic wands.

You know, if your an atheist and know you are so right, then what Is your reason to discuss the existence of a god, are you still unsure, or do you just want people to agree with you so you can be sure?

And dont say I am trying to convert you and that makes you angry so ofcourse you have to get back at me.

 

[WAdude]

No, but as a Christian you should hold yourself to a higher standard. Just because people don't agree with you (respectfully or not) it doesn't mean you need to be disrespectful in return.

If I was visiting a church and observed the behavior displayed by you in this thread, I'd leave and never return.

Why do I need to hold myself to a higher standard, then Id be proof of the point atheists make about how Christians are so arogant and think they are higher than us simply because of their religion.