XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.atheism
XPost: alt.talk.creationism
From: darstec@neo.rr.com
old man joe wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:58:41 -0400, Darrell Stec
> wrote:
>
>>MarkA wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 06:41:19 -0400, old man joe wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> reason # 1. since all mankind came from Adam and Eve and Adam of his
>>>> own free will chose rebellion against God rather than obedience, and
>>>> because of God's judgment against him, out of whom all mankind would be
>>>> born, all
>>>> of mankind has Original Sin imputed to their account Ps. 58:3; Ro.
>>>> 3:10-18... simply put, " a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. "
>>>> Mt.7:17
>>>
>>> If the tree was the "tree of knowledge of good and evil", then before
>>> eating of its fruit, Adam and Eve would have no concept of what evil
>>> was, therefore they could not have known that they were committing a sin
>>> to eat of it.
>>>
>>
>>
>>Don't these idiots realize that there were TWO trees in the garden?
>>Eating the fruit of the second tree, The Tree of Everlasting Life would
>>confer
>>immortality. The man was kicked out of the garden to prevent him from
>>becoming "gods like we." Right in their bible it says there are more than
>>one god and that humans could become gods by eating fruit.
>
> you preach Polytheism which is contrary to the Bible... "
It is in the bible. Elohim is plural. Psalms talks about the 70 sons of
god and a Mrs. God. See Joey, you are reading a sanitized English version
of the bible. If you could read the Hebrew like some of us, you could see
what is really written.
What you consider to be the Ten Commandments (they aren't) the first one
does not say there are no other gods, but rather Yahweh is the personal god
of the tribes of the Hebrews and they should not worship other gods ahead of
him. Leviticus says that whatever sacrifices are required to be made to
Yahweh (the god of thunder and war and of the mountain) and equal sacrifice
must be given to his brother Azazel (god of the desert).
Too bad most of what is in your bible is lost to you. It is a shame because
you pretend that the bible tells you how to save your immortal soul, yet you
only hope the translators got everything right.
> I am the LORD,
> and there is none else,
> there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
> That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that
> there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is
> none else. I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and
> create evil: I the LORD do all
> these things." Isa. 45:5 - 7
>
Why worship a god that creates evil? And remember like father like son.
>>
>>Incidentally the bible is very specific about kicking the MAN out of the
>>garden. It says nothing about the woman. Why do Fundies miss that part?
>
> i am not a Fundy and i doubt very much you even know what a Fundy really
> is according to the Bible.
>
There is nothing in the bible about Fundies. So you would be wrong since I
knew that.
> the problem the Atheists have in interpreting the Bible is that they are
> not allowed by God to
> understand it, Jn. 8:43,44, so they come up with worldly conclusions to
> spiritual things...
>
> in Gen. 3:24 and 4:1 defines they were both removed from the Garden...
3:24 -- vay-egaresh (AND.HE-IS-DRIVING) et-haadam (OUT-THE.MAN) vayashken
(AND.HE-IS-CAUSING-TO-TABERNACLE) mikedem (FROM.EAST) legan-eden (TO.GARDEN-
OF EDEN) et-hakeruvim (THE.CHERUBIM) veet (AND) lahat (FLAME-OF) hakherev
(THE.SWORD) hamithapekhet (THE.ONE-TURNING-HERSELF) lishmor (TO.TO-GUARD-OF)
et-derekh WAY-OF) ets (TREE-OF) hakhayim (THE.LIVES)
Your own verse contradicts you. Notice the verse specifically and ONLY
mentions et-haadam (OUT-THE.MAN) and no mention of Eve whatsoever. Notice
Cherubim is plural.
Strike one.
4:1 -- vehaadam (AND.THE-MAN) yada (HE-KNEW) et-khava (EVE) ishto (WOMAN-
OF-HIM) vatahar (AND-SHE-IS-BECOMING-PREGNANT) vateled (AND-SHE-IS-GIVING-
BIRTH) et-kayin (CAIN) vatomer (AND-SHE-IS-SAYING) kaniti (i.ACQUIRED) ish
(MALE CHILD) et-adonai (WITH.LORD)
Notice here we actually see the name Eve actually mentioned, i.e. khava
(EVE). There is no such name in the preceeding verse. Only the man (or
Adam) is mentioned.
Strike two.
Your verse merely says the lord was an agent when Eve gave birth to Cain,
the first-born). It does not restrict Eve from coming and going in and out
of the garden. You like most Christians read that into the story.
> why
> do Atheists miss that
> part ?
As you can see from the Hebrew, they don't. It is you who are missing
things or rather making them up.
> because of Jn. 8:43,44.
>
That verse has nothing to do with only the man being sent out of the garden.
Strike three.
You are out of the game.
>>They also miss the part where god lies and says they will die on the very
>>day they eat that fruit. The serpent said god was lying. It turns out
>>the
>>serpent was correct. Adam and Eve did not die that day. And further, not
>>only did Adam and Even not know what good and evil were before eating the
>>fruit as you pointed out, only the man got the instructions. Eve wasn't
>>around yet (unless the other story was correct and Adam and Eve were
>>created
>>at the same time out of the dust of the earth. Now what woman in her
>>right
>>mind would expect her husband to get everything right? :-)
>
> you called God a lair which makes you smarter than He although you don't
> even remotely understand the Word of God nor can because of Jn. 8:43,44...
> the death in view was death of the soul, which took place immediately and
> made God unapproachable to them because of sin... this is the same reason
> you are not allowed to understand the Bible, because this same sin dwells
> in you.
>
All men are sinners. Therefore according to your logic nobody including you
can understand.
But that in no way negates the fact that god lied and the serpent told the
truth.
> the body of your rebuttal is Gnosticism, the sin of Adam and Eve. all the
> while you are cursing God
> you are fulfilling everything you speak against. there is plenty of
> Original Sin dwelling in you.
Please read the Anchor Bible, the Interpreter's Bible, The Jerusalem Bible,
The New Jerusalem Reader, or the New American Bible. Every one of them have
footnotes saying the Adam and Eve story is a fable taken from The Epic of
Gilgamesh and the Eluna Elish. So if the story is a fable (as those bibles
explicitly state), there can be no original sin.
--
Later,
Darrell
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
